Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 116 (8733 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 03-22-2017 6:16 PM
437 online now:
DrJones*, Faith, Modulous (AdminModulous), PaulK (4 members, 433 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: timtak
Upcoming Birthdays: OnlyCurious
Post Volume:
Total: 801,810 Year: 6,416/21,208 Month: 2,177/2,634 Week: 365/572 Day: 81/71 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev123456
7
8Next
Author Topic:   Do oceans of water in mantle rock prove the flood?
Faith
Member
Posts: 23945
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.0


Message 91 of 108 (729803)
06-19-2014 8:00 AM
Reply to: Message 89 by JonF
06-19-2014 7:57 AM


Read the two references I gave.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 89 by JonF, posted 06-19-2014 7:57 AM JonF has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 94 by JonF, posted 06-19-2014 8:46 AM Faith has not yet responded

    
Faith
Member
Posts: 23945
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.0


Message 92 of 108 (729804)
06-19-2014 8:02 AM
Reply to: Message 90 by JonF
06-19-2014 8:00 AM


Re: From the "on/off-topic fuzzy" zone
Who gives a damn what you think YECs should think. I don't.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 90 by JonF, posted 06-19-2014 8:00 AM JonF has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 96 by JonF, posted 06-19-2014 9:00 AM Faith has not yet responded

    
jar
Member
Posts: 28422
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.6


Message 93 of 108 (729805)
06-19-2014 8:42 AM
Reply to: Message 88 by Faith
06-19-2014 7:25 AM


Re: From the "on/off-topic fuzzy" zone
As for where rain comes from, why don't all you know-it-alls at least acknowledge the one basic fact of the creationist position which is that THINGS WERE DIFFERENT BACK THEN. The Biblical position is that there had been no rain at all prior to that forty days and forty nights, that the water was suspended in the "firmament" overhead and the earth was watered by a "mist." Rain as we know it was only possible after the Flood when the familiar cycles were established.

Continuing to repeat falsehoods does not make them true. The creationist position that things were different back then has been totally refuted for at least the last 150 years and ALL of the evidence agrees.

There was no Biblical Flood and it has been raining on Earth for billions of years.

Spouting utter nonsense that creationists believe is not evidence.


Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 88 by Faith, posted 06-19-2014 7:25 AM Faith has not yet responded

  
JonF
Member
Posts: 3483
Joined: 06-23-2003
Member Rating: 2.8


Message 94 of 108 (729806)
06-19-2014 8:46 AM
Reply to: Message 91 by Faith
06-19-2014 8:00 AM


Read the two references I gave.

there were no references in the message to which I replied. If you have relevant references in another message, point to it or trot 'em out again so I can point out how irrelevant they are.

No matter how many references you give, mantle material is plastic and flows because of heat and pressure, and solubility does not imply liquidity.

Edited by JonF, : fix material in qs tags


This message is a reply to:
 Message 91 by Faith, posted 06-19-2014 8:00 AM Faith has not yet responded

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 4397
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 2.8


Message 95 of 108 (729807)
06-19-2014 8:47 AM
Reply to: Message 79 by Faith
06-19-2014 5:24 AM


Re: From the "on/off-topic fuzzy" zone
Faith writes:

And my answer to Tangle's off-topic question is the same one I already gave for the reason I already gave: No.

It has to be one of the major miracles described in the bible, probably only second to the creation of the universe. Or was that also not a miracle? And if not who needs God - it appears that the natural world can do it all itself - are you now proposing pantheism, that nature and god are the same thing and knows what needs doing, when and how to do it?


Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android
"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.

Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 79 by Faith, posted 06-19-2014 5:24 AM Faith has not yet responded

  
JonF
Member
Posts: 3483
Joined: 06-23-2003
Member Rating: 2.8


Message 96 of 108 (729808)
06-19-2014 9:00 AM
Reply to: Message 92 by Faith
06-19-2014 8:02 AM


Re: From the "on/off-topic fuzzy" zone
Who gives a damn what you think YECs should think. I don't.

Went right over your head, huh? It's not I think what YECs should think, it's what the majority of YECs do think, especially all of them who have a smidgen of a clue about the properties of water.

We know a lot about the properties of water (hint: Age of Steam) and we know that bringing any appreciable amount of water from the atmosphere or above to the Earth's surface as liquid would release enough heat to boil the oceans and cook everything with thousand-degree temperatures.

Some YEC debunkings of this silly idea can be found at http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/FAQ33.html, https://answersingenesis.org/.../area/tools/flood-waters.asp, http://www.creationtoday.org/...the-flood-without-the-canopy, http://godandscience.org/youngearth/canopy.html, and http://creationwiki.org/Canopy_theory.

But we all realize that reality is of no concern to you.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 92 by Faith, posted 06-19-2014 8:02 AM Faith has not yet responded

  
nwr
Member
Posts: 5504
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005
Member Rating: 5.8


(7)
Message 97 of 108 (729809)
06-19-2014 9:12 AM
Reply to: Message 88 by Faith
06-19-2014 7:25 AM


Re: From the "on/off-topic fuzzy" zone
As for where rain comes from, why don't all you know-it-alls at least acknowledge the one basic fact of the creationist position which is that THINGS WERE DIFFERENT BACK THEN.

So things were different. They were so different that they were contrary to the laws of physics.

But there wasn't any magicking.

[/sarcasm]


Fundamentalism - the anti-American, anti-Christian branch of American Christianity

This message is a reply to:
 Message 88 by Faith, posted 06-19-2014 7:25 AM Faith has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 98 by Diomedes, posted 06-19-2014 11:02 AM nwr has acknowledged this reply

  
Diomedes
Member
Posts: 566
From: Central Florida, USA
Joined: 09-13-2013
Member Rating: 3.3


(1)
Message 98 of 108 (729816)
06-19-2014 11:02 AM
Reply to: Message 97 by nwr
06-19-2014 9:12 AM


Re: From the "on/off-topic fuzzy" zone
Faith writes:

As for where rain comes from, why don't all you know-it-alls at least acknowledge the one basic fact of the creationist position which is that THINGS WERE DIFFERENT BACK THEN.


So things were different. They were so different that they were contrary to the laws of physics.
But there wasn't any magicking.

Based on my understanding, the Flood had two sources from which the water appeared: the rain and the Fountains of the Deep.

1. Pertaining to the rain

Rain is the product of evaporation and condensation of existing water sources. i.e. while rain itself can cause localized flooding in one area, by the law of conservation of mass, another area would have had to give up 'X' amount of water to service that rain. Most of our rain has its origins in sea and ocean water evaporating and then condensing over land. Faith has indicated that the rain source in her scenario is the 'firmament'. However, there is an underlying problem here: a firmament of water encircling the Earth would have blocked out the vast majority of sunlight reaching the surface of the Earth, since photons can only penetrate so far into water. One only needs to go diving to moderate depths to realize this. Thus, the nature and function of the firmament and its permeability to photons is a violation of our known laws of physics.

2. Pertaining to the Fountains of the Deep

Since we don't actually know what these are, let me make some assumptions: they exist underground. There are several problems with this scenario, so let's go through them:
Based on water levels needed, the volume of water required in addition to current ocean levels is massive. I have not done the math, but one can speculate that it was a lot. But to the main point, if the water was occupying 'X' space beneath the surface of the Earth, if that water then moved to the surface, the area that it was filling would then collapse. This is how sinkholes are formed. This would have far reaching ramifications on the topography of the Earth as its land mass would be devastated by this effect.
Additionally, and more importantly, the water itself can only move based on pressure differences. For the scenario that Faith is describing to work, there had to have been some 'force' keeping that original water at bay prior to the Flood. This force (call it a plug if you will) was then released to allow the water to flow. If Faith can describe this force as some natural phenomenon, I would be interested in hearing about that.
But there is one final point. The Earth is now flooded completely. Now, evaporation will cause some of the water to exist in a newly formed cloud barrier. However, the water which was sourced from the Fountains of the Deep has no way of returning to its origin since whatever 'force' was required to keep it at bay would now have to be invoked. And its not a simple plug anymore. It requires a pumping action of some kind. Once again, this is not a 'natural' occurrence.

And we don't even have to get into the whole argument about how the plants survived.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 97 by nwr, posted 06-19-2014 9:12 AM nwr has acknowledged this reply

  
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 15467
Joined: 07-20-2006
Member Rating: 3.8


(1)
Message 99 of 108 (729822)
06-19-2014 12:30 PM
Reply to: Message 86 by Faith
06-19-2014 7:01 AM


Re: From the "on/off-topic fuzzy" zone
I object to your characterization of creationist explanations as "magicking" anything, which is something you love to do. I think you should get a moderator's slap on the wrist -- or better across the jowls -- for that. In discussing the mechanisms of the Flood there is never any reason to invoke anything supernatural or miraculous and I never do.

I was describing the origin of the Earth. If you will agree with me that the Earth formed naturally by accretion, I shall be delighted. Then I'll see if I can interest you in a naturalistic account of the origin of species.

Whatever is whizzing around the Solar System could just as well have been the product of the Flood as whatever happened on earth.

And then it leaped off the Earth, achieving escape velocity, and then turned on its rockets to maneuver itself into completely different orbits from Earth.

But you never invoke anything supernatural or miraculous.

In any case, I have now provided you with two explanations of how the hydroxide got in the ringwoodite --- a dumb creationist one, and a non-dumb non-creationist one. There you go.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 86 by Faith, posted 06-19-2014 7:01 AM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 103 by Faith, posted 06-20-2014 5:55 AM Dr Adequate has responded

  
NoNukes
Member
Posts: 9307
From: Central NC USA
Joined: 08-13-2010
Member Rating: 2.7


(1)
Message 100 of 108 (729828)
06-19-2014 4:33 PM
Reply to: Message 88 by Faith
06-19-2014 7:25 AM


Re: From the "on/off-topic fuzzy" zone
As for where rain comes from, why don't all you know-it-alls at least acknowledge the one basic fact of the creationist position which is that THINGS WERE DIFFERENT BACK THEN.

Because the position is stupid? There was never water suspended in a canopy over the earth.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

I have never met a man so ignorant that I couldn't learn something from him. Galileo Galilei

If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass


This message is a reply to:
 Message 88 by Faith, posted 06-19-2014 7:25 AM Faith has not yet responded

    
Porosity
Member
Posts: 86
From: MT, USA
Joined: 06-15-2013
Member Rating: 4.8


Message 101 of 108 (729834)
06-19-2014 7:11 PM
Reply to: Message 79 by Faith
06-19-2014 5:24 AM


Re: From the "on/off-topic fuzzy" zone
I'm interested in whether the water held in the ringwoodite represents "where the water went" after the Flood. And to be clear, I'm also not terribly interested in this question either, since I think creationists have had sufficient answers to this one too, I'm simply pursuing it as an interesting alternative explanation.

The answer to your question is the water did not go anywhere, the reason for this is cause it did exist on the surface, it was trapped in molecular form under immense pressure as the planet cooled.

The ringwoodite likely came from the interior of the Earth, within our planetís mantle contained in its molecular state, rather than some other source, like comets or magic rain. It's possible water could have been released from its molecular state into a liquid state due to the saturated rocks being partially melted through the action of plate tectonics as the Earth cools.
These new findings could mean this might be the evidence that Earthís water came from these underground reserves. Not the other way round.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 79 by Faith, posted 06-19-2014 5:24 AM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 102 by Faith, posted 06-19-2014 11:48 PM Porosity has not yet responded

    
Faith
Member
Posts: 23945
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.0


Message 102 of 108 (729842)
06-19-2014 11:48 PM
Reply to: Message 101 by Porosity
06-19-2014 7:11 PM


Re: From the "on/off-topic fuzzy" zone
Unfortunately I just can't understand what you are trying to say in that post. Can you make it easier to understand?

Edited by Faith, : Basically rewrote it. First version sounded confrontational which I didn't intend.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 101 by Porosity, posted 06-19-2014 7:11 PM Porosity has not yet responded

    
Faith
Member
Posts: 23945
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.0


Message 103 of 108 (729848)
06-20-2014 5:55 AM
Reply to: Message 99 by Dr Adequate
06-19-2014 12:30 PM


Re: From the "on/off-topic fuzzy" zone
I believe I had added an edit that should have made your silly response look as silly as it is. The edit said something about how it was all part of the Flood event, hoping to correct the impression that I meant the Flood itself.

I hope this clarifies things.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 99 by Dr Adequate, posted 06-19-2014 12:30 PM Dr Adequate has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 104 by Dr Adequate, posted 06-20-2014 4:50 PM Faith has not yet responded

    
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 15467
Joined: 07-20-2006
Member Rating: 3.8


(4)
Message 104 of 108 (729880)
06-20-2014 4:50 PM
Reply to: Message 103 by Faith
06-20-2014 5:55 AM


Re: From the "on/off-topic fuzzy" zone
So when the Flood was busy fooling paleontologists by stacking the fauna to make the fossil record reflect the theory of evolution, and while it was fiddling with the radiometric dates to make the Earth look old and fool the geologists, some part of "the Flood event", but not the Flood itself, was doing stuff in space to deceive astronomers? Something that the Bible doesn't mention, but which you can daydream about in terms so vague that it's impossible to form a mental picture of what you can possibly be thinking of?
This message is a reply to:
 Message 103 by Faith, posted 06-20-2014 5:55 AM Faith has not yet responded

  
Dedit
Junior Member (Idle past 898 days)
Posts: 2
Joined: 07-02-2014


Message 105 of 108 (732519)
07-07-2014 11:45 PM


Not impressed by these creationist arguments.

Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Add 2 blank lines between paragraphs.

Edited by Dedit, : No reason given.


Replies to this message:
 Message 106 by Dr Adequate, posted 07-08-2014 12:21 AM Dedit has not yet responded
 Message 107 by Pressie, posted 07-08-2014 7:19 AM Dedit has not yet responded

    
Prev123456
7
8Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017