Noah's Flood Came Down. It's Goin Back Up!!

I searched this board and failed to find any discussion of the hydroplate theory. I probably did something wrong in my search, I'm sure it would have come up on this forum at some point. It is (IMO) a plausible explanation/model for a worldwide catastrophic flood and the reshaping of the earth's surface.A good summary of the theory is at Page Not FoundIt may be a little off-topic, please direct me to the more appropriate topic/area if so.Thanks!

It was discussed but I will be bleeped if I can find it either. Main points against the theory were
1) Generation of enough heat to cook, broil and steam everything on the planet
2) Generation of otehr toxic conditions by the release of sulfates and other harmeful aerosols from the lava from the rapis shifting of the plates
3) a couple of others that I can not remember. Maybe TB, TQ or Minnie would remember. How about it you guys? Anyone remember where this was? I also remember discussing the computer model from Los Alimos and the heat generated by it.------------------
"Chance favors the prepared mind." L. Pasteur
Taz[This message has been edited by Dr_Tazimus_maximus, 05-28-2003]

There is no way to directly link to search results for "hydroplate".To do the search, go to http://http://www.evcforum.net/cgi-bin/search_new.cgi?action=int...Enter "hydroplate" into the "Search Words" field.
Set "Search Forum/Archive" field to "Search All Open Forums and Archives".
Set "Search By" field to "Messages".There are a number of "finds" (17, as of yours being the most recent), but I don't think the hydroplate theory has ever had a topic of it's own. My impression is that even most creationists don't find much value in it.Go ahead, start a new "Geology and the Great Flood" topic on the "Hydroplate Theory". But be prepared for the wrath of the geologists and others, to come down on you.Cheers,
Adminnemooseus

Thanks Adminnemooseus.I followed your directions, (which is what I thought I did previously) and found the messages. Maybe I had not logged in yet the first time, would that matter?Anyway, it does look like there has been quite a bit said about it, I'll read through it before I give it its own thread (may not be necessary).

I think it calls for rapid radioactive decay to generate mantle softening heat and mess up radiometric dating. Thus creating way too much heat and maybe a radiation problem.

Not to mention its inability to explain magnetic striping of seafloor or the massive amounts of very fine sediment in the Atlantic Basin. Though I do think Walt Brown's eruption of the "Fountains of the Deep" at the Mid-Atlantic Ridge violently enough to launch the asteroid belt would be a cute special effect in a very cheesy SF movie.

Hi BuzzI'll leave the scientific stuff to the experts, but I'd like to run with the archaeological references to the Bible you make here. I seriously doubt that you have accessed any credible archaelogists work, you cite people who are not qualified archaeologists, peole who are little more than fringe fanatics. If you had accessed any repected archaeologists work, you would realise that you really need to reinterpret many Bible accounts in order to make them fit the archaoelogical evidence. Speaking from an archaeological perspective, what does your statement actually mean?I recently exchanged a few e-mails with the president of Wyatt Archaeological Research, Richard Rives, and it seems that just as the creation ‘scientists’ know next to nothing about science, Christian ‘archaeologists’ know next to nothing about archaeology.Richard Rives comes across as a man who is very ignorant of any archaeological methodology, he consistently avoided answering basic questions about archaeology and the Hebrew Bible, and, when it was obvious that he was out of his depth, he resorted to the old inerrantist trick of popping in a vague and irrelevant statement.E-mails are a private thing and I would never disclose the contents of anyone’s e-mail, however I see nothing wrong with posting the questions that I asked Richard to answer, suffice to say he actually didn’t answer any of them. Here are a few:1. Have you any qualification at all that is related to archaeology?2. Where in the Hebrew Bible is it stated that the Israelites crossed the Red Sea?3. Why should we take the word of an unqualified amateur against the word of qualified scientists?4. Do you truly have a clear conscience with this? (Peddling Wyatt’s garbage)5. At your seminars do you inform people that Ron wasn’t a qualified archaeologist?6. At your seminars do you tell people that Ron failed a lie detector test?7. At your seminars do you tell people that Ron conned Gary Amirault out of 30 thousand dollars?8. At your seminars do you tell people that one of Ron's sons has told people that Ron planted the chariot wheels in the Red Sea himself?9. If I found a very large wooden boat in the mountains of Ararat with the name 'Noah' emblazoned on its hull, as far as archaeology is concerned, what does this actually mean?The ‘answer’ he gave to question 9 was particularly embarrassing, suffice to say that it wasn’t really an ‘answer’ at all.I asked him many more questions and he actually showed a complete ignorance of anything related to Near Eastern archaeology, I suppose I shouldn’t have been surprised, these people are simply not interested in the truth at all. They hold on to their unsubstantiated stance and ignore the work of committed individuals because it disproves their fantasy.This is the type of people that you revere Buzz, basically they are liars and crooks, they con gullible, poorly educated Christians by peddling garbage like this as being true and claiming that it proves the Bible accounts. What these clowns do not realise is that archaeology CANNOT prove very much in the Bible. It can prove that perhaps certain people actually lived, or that certain cities were occupied at certain times, but this is almost as good as it gets for the Bible from an archaeological perspective.Have a think about the question I asked at the start of this post:The discovery of chariot wheels in the Gulf of Aqaba actually means what?I look forward to your reply.Brian.

quote:

---

The discovery of chariot wheels in the Gulf of Aqaba actually means what?

---

It is highly indicative that the Israelites left Egypt at the Exodus, proceeded North of the Red Sea above the Gulf of Suez down to the Gulf of Aqaba where they crossed over persued by the Egyptians. I saw photos of one wheel on video heavily encrusted with coral which means it would have not been a plant. This was on the "Prophecy in the News" program on Sky Angel unrelated to Wyatt. I haven't gotten the book yet and don't have much more to say about it until I read the book.I have followed Wyatt's excavations to the alleged Noah ark impression in the earth near some large ballast stones as well as viewed David Fassold's video on that site and I believe it is an impression left in the earth when the ark rotted away. I heard him give a talk on his expeditions where he showed slides and lectured a few years before he died. I don't believe it petrified as Wyatt implied. Baumgartner hasn't proven anything, imo as to whether or not it was authentic. First he said, 'yes it was' and then changed his mind. I've seen nothing substantial from him for refutation.

quote:

---

I seriously doubt that you have accessed any credible archaelogists work, you cite people who are not qualified archaeologists, peole who are little more than fringe fanatics. If you had accessed any repected archaeologists work, you would realise that you really need to reinterpret many Bible accounts in order to make them fit the archaoelogical evidence.

---

Most educated professional archeologists and scientists have been programmed in school to believe the theories, I say theories, taught in these schools. They insist on interpreting eveything they see to fit what they've been programmed to believe. They are the vast majority, so everything Biblical folks, who are the minority, teach about what is observed is naturally debunked by the pros.

quote:

---

I recently exchanged a few e-mails with the president of Wyatt Archaeological Research, Richard Rives, and it seems that just as the creation ?scientists? know next to nothing about science, Christian ?archaeologists? know next to nothing about archaeology.

​

Richard Rives comes across as a man who is very ignorant of any archaeological methodology, he consistently avoided answering basic questions about archaeology and the Hebrew Bible, and, when it was obvious that he was out of his depth, he resorted to the old inerrantist trick of popping in a vague and irrelevant statement.

---

Of course, you would likely view anyone who interprets what is observed from a Biblical perspective as ignorant on archeological methodogy, wouldn't you?
Which Hebrew Bible were you referring to in your questioning?

I'd like to talk about the possibility of big time world wide drought, as the Biblical prophets are indicating........Noah's flood going back up!1. We are experiencing global warming.
2. Our weather is coming up with many new records so far as violent stuff goes. I'm almost 68, and I know there's been big time change in incidence of tornados and violent weather than when I was young.
3. The prophet John, in Revelation predicted a third of the trees to be burnt up. He also predicted a three and a half year period of extreme drought on the earth involving two powerful prophets of God to emerge on the scene.
4. In spite of much better equipment and prevention techniques, a great increase in forest fires.
5. Drought conditions seem to be steadily increasing world wide.
6. With big time evaporation from drought the prediction of the prophets of the darkening of the atmosphere could become a reality as moisture accumulates upstairs.
7 The hint of a meteor hitting an ocean wiping out a third of the ships, if fulfilled, could alter the earth's position in it's orbit, it would seem. This may also work to trigger new weather patterns on the planet.
8. The planet is beginning to look more and more like it could indeed experience the prophesied phenomena.
9. Drought to the extent of evaporating much of the oceans would most assuredly precipitate the worldwide earthquakes predicted in Revelation and other prophetic scriptures.
10. Nuclear warfare and accidents may factor in here as well as industrial pollution.
11. I've said the above to say that the terrarium canopy, believed to be on the planet before the flood by many Biblicalists could return to create the conditions prophesied about the "plowman overtaking the reaper," and so forth for the time of the messianic millenium of the messiah, Jesus who will return to earth "with clouds."

quote:

---

buzsaw wrote:
Most educated professional archeologists and scientists have been programmed in school to believe the theories, I say theories, taught in these schools.

---

Damn those science course! Why the hell do they spend all their time teaching theories, I say theories, when they could save an inordinant amount of time and thought by simply listening to their nearest home-schooled, fundamentalist fruitloop for Christ or UFOlogist.You apparently know little or nothing about the history of Syro-Palestinian Archaeology which was strongly driven by a desire and expection of validating the Tanach. See, for example, the works of Albright and G. E. Wright, or even Yadin and Mazar.

quote:

---

Since the prophecies and other supernatural stuff prove the Bible to be supernatural, I believe I have a more sound foundation than you.

---

Your entire foundation rests on your belief in a book written by human hands a few thousand years ago, instead of the evidence you can see with your own eyes right now. This is called faith, and generally it's not a good idea to mix it with science.Of course, if you believe that the flood happened you will look for - and probably find - evidence to this effect. The drilling in the Black Sea only proves that the area surrounding the Black Sea was flooded, not the entire world. If you are correct then there must be some evidence in Ireland, say - and every other country for that matter - of a major flood 4000 years ago. The fact is that there isn't - and your faith will not change this.

quote:

---

I take scriptures like this and begin on these foundation stones. Ever so slowly, archeology and science is forced to move toward acknowledging these scriptures with a growing number of adherants to them in academia among them.

---

Starting with an idea and trying to force the evidence to fit it is not scientific. Any scriptures can only be acknowledged when they are supported by fact. Science acknowledges that large scale flooding occured in the area of Mesapotamia (the "cradle of civilisation") - science has never acknowledged that there was a single, world-wide flood at any point in known history, because there is no evidence to support it.I am aware of the fact that you will probably never be convinced that the Bible is wrong, and for that I am sorry. Still, if you have an open mind, read this web page:Problems with a Global Flood, 2nd editionI don't know if I posted it before - it's a very interesting read.The Rock Hound

Psalms 106:7-11 Clearly stated.Psalms 136:13-14 Clearly stated.Acts 7:35-36 Clearly stated.Hebrews 11:29 Clearly stated.Also Ex.13:18 makes clear the way of the RED SEA.Also Ex.14:1-31 combined with the above solidifies the RED SEA as the one.Also Ex.15:1-19 combined with the above solidifies the RED SEA as the one.Also Josh.2:10 Clearly stated.Also Ex.15:4-5 What did they go into the RED SEA for? A swim?Shall I go on ? OkDeut.11:4 Combined with the above, its clear. Egyptians in chariots pursue Israeliets on dry land in middle of RED SEA.Joshua 4:21-24 Clearly stated. Israel crosses RED SEA on dry land.Joshua 24:6-7 Clearly stated. Israel crosses RED SEA followed by Egyptians chariots and horsemen whom drown in it.I know why you cavil over this question Brian. However, there are just too many references pointing to the actual RED SEA itself as the correct name for, and the correct body of, the water that the Israelites crossed over, and not some other or under some other name.Respectfully, Paul.

Notes in my Bible, re. Exodus 14-9:

quote:

---

The fortress towns named indicate that the "Red Sea" which the Israelites crossed was to the north of the Red Sea proper. The name would be more accurately translated "Reed Sea".

---

Moose

quote:

---

The name would be more accurately translated "Reed Sea".

---

Guess that God's spell checker must have been broken when he helped those poor believers translate that section into latin or english .------------------
"Chance favors the prepared mind." L. Pasteur
Taz