Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 156 (8114 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 08-23-2014 1:34 AM
70 online now:
Minnemooseus (Adminnemooseus) (1 member, 69 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: a9.hard
Upcoming Birthdays: riVeRraT
Post Volume:
Total: 734,754 Year: 20,595/28,606 Month: 1,092/2,774 Week: 213/244 Day: 1/57 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev1
...
56
7
8910Next
Author Topic:   REAL Flood Geology
shytot
Inactive Member


Message 91 of 137 (369605)
12-13-2006 6:42 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Archer Opteryx
11-20-2006 5:08 AM


The water would still be covering the land.
If it was a world wide flood there would be no land above water, the water would still be there,
where would it go? where could it go?

Edited by shytot, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Archer Opteryx, posted 11-20-2006 5:08 AM Archer Opteryx has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 101 by Buzsaw, posted 12-19-2006 9:59 PM shytot has not yet responded

  
Joman
Inactive Member


Message 92 of 137 (370938)
12-19-2006 3:33 PM
Reply to: Message 83 by anglagard
12-08-2006 7:46 PM


Re: General nature of global flood enviroment.
Anglagard,

I read your post.
Unless you specify a example you think is appropriate to refute the possibility of ther ever having been a global flood we're not getting anywhere.

Joman.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 83 by anglagard, posted 12-08-2006 7:46 PM anglagard has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 93 by 4Pillars, posted 12-19-2006 6:48 PM Joman has not yet responded
 Message 94 by roxrkool, posted 12-19-2006 9:05 PM Joman has not yet responded
 Message 95 by anglagard, posted 12-19-2006 9:22 PM Joman has not yet responded
 Message 99 by sidelined, posted 12-19-2006 9:57 PM Joman has not yet responded

  
4Pillars
Inactive Member


Message 93 of 137 (370990)
12-19-2006 6:48 PM
Reply to: Message 92 by Joman
12-19-2006 3:33 PM


Re: General nature of global flood enviroment.
Correct, had it been the case - the waters would still be here. However, the universal flood did not happen on this planet.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 92 by Joman, posted 12-19-2006 3:33 PM Joman has not yet responded

  
roxrkool
Member
Posts: 1489
From: Nevada
Joined: 03-23-2003


Message 94 of 137 (371014)
12-19-2006 9:05 PM
Reply to: Message 92 by Joman
12-19-2006 3:33 PM


Re: General nature of global flood enviroment.
Lets start out small.

The geologic record contains layer after layer of sediments exhibiting mud or dessication cracks and paleosols (ancient soil horizons). How do you form those under water?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 92 by Joman, posted 12-19-2006 3:33 PM Joman has not yet responded

    
anglagard
Member
Posts: 2013
From: Big Spring, TX, USA
Joined: 03-18-2006


Message 95 of 137 (371023)
12-19-2006 9:22 PM
Reply to: Message 92 by Joman
12-19-2006 3:33 PM


Re: General nature of global flood enviroment.
I brought up specific examples of interbedded evaporites in the Castile and interbedded sand and mud in the Haymond Formations. I brought up aeolian deposits, volcanic deposits that can only be formed in air (slightly mistaken on breccia, looks like may also form in shallow water) and glacial deposits, all of which are found buried within supposed flood sediments.

But it is OK if you do not want to discuss such matters with my 24+ year-old memory of the geosciences (in a 49 year-old body) now that roxrkool is here.

Enjoy :)

Edited by anglagard, : clarity

Edited by anglagard, : Haymond not evaporite


This message is a reply to:
 Message 92 by Joman, posted 12-19-2006 3:33 PM Joman has not yet responded

    
Buzsaw
Member (Idle past 336 days)
Posts: 9158
From: new york usa
Joined: 03-14-2003


Message 96 of 137 (371026)
12-19-2006 9:49 PM
Reply to: Message 46 by Archer Opteryx
11-22-2006 12:38 AM


Re: Magic Water
AO writes:

What do YECs say about the height of antediluvian mountains? Were the Himalayas covered? Or were the Himalayas raised as part of the upheaval?

This YECer believes that the earth was relatively (I say 'relatively') smooth at the crust and surface with much lower mountains/hills and shallow smaller oceans, having a canopy atmosphere. My understanding is that the ocean bottom crusts are an average of 3 miles thick while the continents average around 20 miles thick. Logically the amount of water required to cover the hills would be far less than what would be required today. The weight of the water sank down the thin crusts into the molten core, pushing up the mountain ranges like the Himalayas as the tetonic plates gave way to cause extreme geographic upheavel in some areas and extreme depression in the weaker protions of the crust, et al.

The above is not falsifiable but a logical hypothesis to answer the question as to how a global flood might make the earth appear from a YEC perspective.


BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW ---- Jesus said, "When these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads, for your redemption draws near." Luke 21:28
This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by Archer Opteryx, posted 11-22-2006 12:38 AM Archer Opteryx has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 97 by Coragyps, posted 12-19-2006 9:54 PM Buzsaw has not yet responded
 Message 98 by anglagard, posted 12-19-2006 9:56 PM Buzsaw has not yet responded
 Message 100 by kuresu, posted 12-19-2006 9:57 PM Buzsaw has not yet responded
 Message 108 by roxrkool, posted 12-20-2006 5:14 PM Buzsaw has responded

  
Coragyps
Member
Posts: 5130
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002
Member Rating: 2.0


Message 97 of 137 (371027)
12-19-2006 9:54 PM
Reply to: Message 96 by Buzsaw
12-19-2006 9:49 PM


Re: Magic Water
The weight of the water sank down the thin crusts into the molten core, pushing up the mountain ranges like the Himalayas as the tetonic plates gave way...

Which is more dense, Buzsaw - water or rock? Will a mile of water balance a mile of rock?

The above is not falsifiable...

Oh yeah? It's already falsified.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 96 by Buzsaw, posted 12-19-2006 9:49 PM Buzsaw has not yet responded

    
anglagard
Member
Posts: 2013
From: Big Spring, TX, USA
Joined: 03-18-2006


Message 98 of 137 (371028)
12-19-2006 9:56 PM
Reply to: Message 96 by Buzsaw
12-19-2006 9:49 PM


Re: Magic Water
buzsaw writes:

The above is not falsifiable but a logical hypothesis to answer the question as to how a global flood might make the earth appear from a YEC perspective.

Have you ever heard of the principle of isostasy? Put simply it means that light things float and heavy things sink.

Show me the math that says 15 cubits worth of water (density=1) would sink continental crust (density=2.7) into the mantle (density=3.5+).

Logical :laugh:


This message is a reply to:
 Message 96 by Buzsaw, posted 12-19-2006 9:49 PM Buzsaw has not yet responded

    
sidelined 
Inactive Suspended Member


Message 99 of 137 (371029)
12-19-2006 9:57 PM
Reply to: Message 92 by Joman
12-19-2006 3:33 PM


Re: General nature of global flood enviroment.
Joman

Unless you specify a example you think is appropriate to refute the possibility of there ever having been a global flood

Rainfall and expulsion of "waters of the deep" {something never specifically explained BTW}of the intensity required to produce a flood covering the entire earth is not possible due to the heat energy produced in the process which would effectively kill all life on earth excepting perhaps extremophiles. It is thus impossible to avoid the horrible consequence of such a flood which would steam alive any creatures in the environment.

The 100% humidity would also kill animals that do not sweat {like dogs} since they depend upon evaporation of moisture from their tongues in order to cool their core temperature.It would be impossible for them to survive a prolonged exposure to such conditions.

Ice worms

{http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_worms} and {http://www.nichols.edu/departments/glacier/iceworm.htm}

are incapable of surviving off glaciers in temperatures above a few degrees of the freezing point of water. In the absence of a refrigeration system{ not to mention their food source snow algae} it would be impossible to have them aboard an ark much less survive immersion in liquid water.

Need more examples? Just ask.


Dear Mrs Chown, Ignore your son's attempts to teach you physics. Physics isn't the most important thing. Love is.

Best wishes, Richard Feynman.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 92 by Joman, posted 12-19-2006 3:33 PM Joman has not yet responded

  
kuresu
Member (Idle past 1678 days)
Posts: 2544
From: boulder, colorado
Joined: 03-24-2006


Message 100 of 137 (371030)
12-19-2006 9:57 PM
Reply to: Message 96 by Buzsaw
12-19-2006 9:49 PM


Re: Magic Water
above is not falsifiable but a logical hypothesis

then its not a logical hypothesis. if it's not falsifiable, its not a hypothesis. it would be a statement of faith, if anything.

fortunately for you, it is falsifiable, because we know how the hymalans were formed--not by your screwed up geoscience.

the geological upheavel/trauma is not cause by a massive depression of the tectonic plates, but by lateral, aka horizontal, movement of the plate. i'll let the other, more geologically inclined handle the rest of the misunderstandings.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 96 by Buzsaw, posted 12-19-2006 9:49 PM Buzsaw has not yet responded

    
Buzsaw
Member (Idle past 336 days)
Posts: 9158
From: new york usa
Joined: 03-14-2003


Message 101 of 137 (371032)
12-19-2006 9:59 PM
Reply to: Message 91 by shytot
12-13-2006 6:42 PM


Re: The water would still be covering the land.
shytot writes:

If it was a world wide flood there would be no land above water, the water would still be there,
where would it go? where could it go?

Hi Shytot. We welcome you to EvC. As per my message 96, imo it would have broken up the tetonic plates sinking deep depressions in the thinner areas of earth's crust to create our deep oceans. Whereas about 70 percent of the earth's surface is ocean, likely before the flood it was maybe 20 or 30 percent with the water both subsurface and in the atmosphere to effect the flood. Of course a large amount of it would have evaporated to create the post flood atmosphere.


BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW ---- Jesus said, "When these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads, for your redemption draws near." Luke 21:28
This message is a reply to:
 Message 91 by shytot, posted 12-13-2006 6:42 PM shytot has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 102 by DrJones*, posted 12-19-2006 10:10 PM Buzsaw has responded
 Message 103 by anglagard, posted 12-19-2006 10:12 PM Buzsaw has not yet responded

  
DrJones*
Member
Posts: 1551
From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Joined: 08-19-2004


Message 102 of 137 (371033)
12-19-2006 10:10 PM
Reply to: Message 101 by Buzsaw
12-19-2006 9:59 PM


Re: The water would still be covering the land.
Of course a large amount of it would have evaporated to create the post flood atmosphere.

Wait I thought the mystical magical "vapor canopy" existed before the flood not after it. Hows does large amounts of evaporated water creat the atmosphere we see today?

Edited by DrJones*, : No reason given.


Just a monkey in a long line of kings.
If "elitist" just means "not the dumbest motherfucker in the room", I'll be an elitist!
*not an actual doctor
This message is a reply to:
 Message 101 by Buzsaw, posted 12-19-2006 9:59 PM Buzsaw has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 106 by Buzsaw, posted 12-19-2006 10:29 PM DrJones* has responded

  
anglagard
Member
Posts: 2013
From: Big Spring, TX, USA
Joined: 03-18-2006


Message 103 of 137 (371035)
12-19-2006 10:12 PM
Reply to: Message 101 by Buzsaw
12-19-2006 9:59 PM


Re: The water would still be covering the land.
buzsaw writes:

Of course a large amount of it would have evaporated to create the post flood atmosphere.

Under what conditions would the water have evaporated to space? The boiling oceans caused by that absurd runaway tectonic, volcanic, and meteoric, activity?

Once again, light things float and heavy things sink. The only molecules that float away are H2 and He. H2O is too heavy to just decide on its own to achieve escape velocity.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 101 by Buzsaw, posted 12-19-2006 9:59 PM Buzsaw has not yet responded

    
Buzsaw
Member (Idle past 336 days)
Posts: 9158
From: new york usa
Joined: 03-14-2003


Message 104 of 137 (371036)
12-19-2006 10:19 PM


OK folks. I'll let the scientific minds debate the science. I answered the question posed to YECers with my own views. Would an earth covering amount of rain crack and depress a three mile thick earth crust? Would it depend some on the unknown properties of what's down under the molten outer core?


BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW ---- Jesus said, "When these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads, for your redemption draws near." Luke 21:28
Replies to this message:
 Message 105 by anglagard, posted 12-19-2006 10:25 PM Buzsaw has not yet responded

  
anglagard
Member
Posts: 2013
From: Big Spring, TX, USA
Joined: 03-18-2006


Message 105 of 137 (371039)
12-19-2006 10:25 PM
Reply to: Message 104 by Buzsaw
12-19-2006 10:19 PM


Light Things Float and Heavy Things Sink
Buzsaw writes:

Would an earth covering amount of rain crack and depress a three mile thick earth crust?

No because - Light Things Float and Heavy Things Sink

Would it depend some on the unknown properties of what's down under the molten outer core?

No because - Light Things Float and Heavy Things Sink

Isostasy, it's simple physics.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 104 by Buzsaw, posted 12-19-2006 10:19 PM Buzsaw has not yet responded

    
Prev1
...
56
7
8910Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2014 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2014