The Flood = many coincidences

As pointed out to you (for example in post #267) the velocity is not "nil". We know this because the displacement is not nil.Displacement over time can indeed be "defined as velocity per se".And mass in motion possesses kinetic energy.You fail.

You know how I explained to you that assertion is not argument?Let's try a little logic here. The energy sufficient to move plates by 2 cm per year is sufficient energy to move plates by 2 cm per year. Do you deny this? And yet when I asked you for a demonstration, you stopped posting for three months. Did you hope we'd forgotten?Let's ask again. Can you show me any instance where the results of compression mimic the structure and behavior of a mid-ocean rift and ridge? And yet it's always (for example) people who have studied medicine who walk away with the Nobel Prizes in medicine, and never those know-it-all architects. I wonder why that is?Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

I made it 8600 joules using the same figures.I think you added on too many 0s to your figure for the mass. Also there are 365 days in a year, not 356.However, there is an easier and more readily graspable way of putting this:The energy is such that, over the course of a year, a lithospheric plate moves about two centimeters. That's the figure that we need to know, and it's the figure we started off with.

You're talking about underground water? Well, on the same basis there's also enough water in the oceans "to cover even Everest by a mile or two" if you can persuade it to levitate out of the oceans. But otherwise not. No, I think that he was taking about grace or some similar theological abstraction, and I don't think that that's what the author of Genesis meant drowned all the puppies and kittens and duck-billed platypuses. I think that by "water" he meant water and by "rain" he meant rain.Of course, if you don't want to take Genesis literally, this would be a great time to stop being a creationist.

Who, Jesus or the author of Genesis?The author of Genesis meant water. When I read passages like this: What can I say? If that is not actually about rain, and a flood, and water, and the Ark floating, but about something else entirely, then by the same token the Gospels might really be about a rabbit learning to play the trombone.Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

Well, see they have a problem. If they put the flood at a particular geological horizon, then we can divide sedimentary rocks into pre- and post-flood, the pre-flood rocks either being deposited by normal processes before the flood or magicked into existence In The Beginning. But then they'd face the awkward question of why pre-flood rocks have the same sedimentology as rocks produced by a magic flood; also why the pre-flood rocks contain fossils when so many creationists insist that fossils require a magical catastrophe for their formation. Though I'm not sure that all that many of them have thought about it that carefully.

And this is also presumably evidence of something.But what?

There are several here.

And presumably this is "exactly as it would be" if there was a Santa Claus.There isn't, by the way. But don't you think it's odd that everyone except the Jews forgot the one really useful aspect of the story?The important moral to take away, surely, is that there's one God, namely Yahweh, who kills people when he's pissed, and who disapproves of such things as polytheism, idol-worship, and so on and so forth.Instead, they forgot all about that. Instead the Greeks, for example, remembered that Zeus sent Deucalion's Flood --- and of course they knew that Zeus was fine with polytheism, just loved idol-worship, and was OK with them sodomizing teenage boys.Apparently the human race is like someone who drinks and drives, crashes his car killing his wife and children, is paralyzed from the waist down, is jailed for ten years, and the thing he learns from the incident is not "don't drink and drive" but "I was going at exactly 83 miles per hour, which is a prime number". Yeah? In what way does the Bible "flesh out" this story: What this has in common with the story of Noah's Flood is that it has a flood in it. And that it's got a magical being in it. And that it's not true.

This appears to have been translated from Korean into English via Hungarian.Am I close?

Well, since "the water covered them", I guess that that's a flood. And it's definitely a myth. So it's a flood myth.To suggest that it doesn't corroborate the Book of Genesis would be churlishly accurate.

Perhaps we should let geologists decide what geology is. Many of them would find it quite difficult to study rocks without knowing what rocks are made of. It's quite a basic consideration.How, for example, would you go about studying the chemical weathering of granite without knowing its chemical composition? --- if you had to do so while being neutral on the question of whether it was composed of (a) felsic minerals (b) cotton candy (c) green cheese?I must say that it speaks very poorly of creationists when you demand (as you have done repeatedly) that scientists should be obliged to ignore relevant facts. And what can be more relevant to the study of rocks than the question of what rocks are made of.

And the same process and forces will have different effects on different materials. For example, high pressures and temperatures will have a different effect on calcium carbonate from the effect of the exact same process on cotton candy.For this reason it is useful to geologists to know that limestone is composed of the former and not the latter. And it is, in fact, essential. Hence, it is geology.---Now, will you stop being wrong about the definition of geology and start being wrong about the Flood instead?Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

While there is a certain amount of amusement to be gotten out of being lectured on geology by someone thinks that "magma" is spelled "magna", I think I'll stick to getting my information about geology from geologists. That's because, unlike geologists, you know fuck-all about geology.