Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 87 (8929 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 08-26-2019 4:08 AM
31 online now:
AZPaul3, Heathen, PaulK (3 members, 28 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: Jedothek
Post Volume:
Total: 860,465 Year: 15,501/19,786 Month: 2,224/3,058 Week: 82/516 Day: 3/79 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Big-Sediment vs. Little-Sediment Flood Geology?
Minnemooseus
Member
Posts: 3749
From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior)
Joined: 11-11-2001
Member Rating: 3.0


Message 6 of 18 (72909)
12-15-2003 3:01 AM


My image of the results of the "Great Flood" (presuming God pulled 2 miracles to produce all that water from "thin air", and then got rid of all that water, again to "thin air"):

Assuming that there was an extremely heavy world wide rain fall for 40 days and nights, I would expect that the results would be great areas of the continents largely stripped down to bedrock. This massive sediment load would be dumped as massive river deltas, which would contain large boulders from the ultra-high stream and river flow.

As such, the evidence would not be a world wide sediment layer, but rather vast areas of land devoid of sediment.

This would seem to be an "old earth" model. The geological evidence is totally at odds with a "young earth", unless God created it with apparent age.

Moose

Added by edit:
I read the previous message more carefully, after posting the above.

quote:
Even more to the point are the effects of the upland erosion that would result from intense, long-term, saturating rainfall scouring the supersaturated earth over a forty-day period...

That "upland erosion" was what I was think of, when I talked of the ground being stripped to the bedrock.

Still Moose

[This message has been edited by minnemooseus, 12-15-2003]


Replies to this message:
 Message 7 by Abshalom, posted 12-15-2003 8:04 AM Minnemooseus has not yet responded
 Message 8 by roxrkool, posted 12-15-2003 10:51 AM Minnemooseus has not yet responded

    
Minnemooseus
Member
Posts: 3749
From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior)
Joined: 11-11-2001
Member Rating: 3.0


Message 11 of 18 (72981)
12-15-2003 1:48 PM


I think we are all pretty much in agreement, with each of us adding detail that others have neglected. Perhaps a pretty good model, especially considering that we have no idea where the water came from, or where it went.

For the sake of speculation, I put forward this "what if" model of ocean basin change. Suppose that the floor of all the worlds oceans were to be at the elevation of the current sea level (just grant this idea, don't argue why it can't be). Also assume that the continental topography remained the same.

If such were the case, what would sea level be, relative to that "sea level" elevation ocean floor? A fair approximation of this would be, the depth of the ocean if the volume of the ocean would be spread out over a sphere of the diameter of the (real) sea level.

Someone needs to find or calculate the surface area of the earth, find the total volume of the oceans, and then spread that volume over that area, and calculate the resultant water depth. I'm trying to pass the job off onto someone else .

Moose


Replies to this message:
 Message 12 by roxrkool, posted 12-15-2003 1:49 PM Minnemooseus has not yet responded
 Message 13 by Abshalom, posted 12-15-2003 2:03 PM Minnemooseus has responded
 Message 15 by Minnemooseus, posted 12-15-2003 11:49 PM Minnemooseus has not yet responded

    
Minnemooseus
Member
Posts: 3749
From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior)
Joined: 11-11-2001
Member Rating: 3.0


Message 14 of 18 (72997)
12-15-2003 2:30 PM
Reply to: Message 13 by Abshalom
12-15-2003 2:03 PM


Re: Storm Intensity and Drawdown Effects
For the sake of this discussion, I was not trying to produce all the water via rainfall. The rainfall would just be a "side-issue" of the flood.

Also, I've been pondering a substantial world wide flood, but not one substantial enough to cover the highest mountains.

I was thinking of an example flood, where sea level would rise, say, 2000 meters. That would still cover a lot of the continents.

If the entire flood event were to be confined to 1 year, and assuming uniform rates, then that 2000 meter sea level rise would happen in 1/2 year (182.5 days). 2000 meters / 182.5 days = sea level rising at 11 meters per day. The rise over 40 days would be 440 meters.

I heard quite a while back (notes long misplaced), that the recorded record 24 hour rainfall was something like 80 inches (call it 2 meters). This was at the Ascension(sp?) Islands, in the Indian Ocean, during a typhoon.

Moose


This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by Abshalom, posted 12-15-2003 2:03 PM Abshalom has not yet responded

    
Minnemooseus
Member
Posts: 3749
From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior)
Joined: 11-11-2001
Member Rating: 3.0


Message 15 of 18 (73221)
12-15-2003 11:49 PM
Reply to: Message 11 by Minnemooseus
12-15-2003 1:48 PM


OK, I worked out the problem.

Earth diameter = 1.27x107 m, therefore radius = 6.35x107 m
http://www.vendian.org/envelope/dir1/earth_jupiter_sun.html

Volume of the oceans = 1.3x109 km3 = 1.3x1018 m3
The average depth of the oceans = 2.5 miles = 4 km = 4000 m
http://hypertextbook.com/facts/2001/SyedQadri.shtml

Sphere volume = 4/3 Pi r3

I added the volume of the oceans to the calculated volume of the earth (by the way, the oceans volumes is only about 0.1 percent of the Earth's volume, so I was taking some liberties with significant figures).

Ramming that new sphere volume back through the sphere volume formula gave me a radius increase (sea level rise) of 2560 meters.

Moose

Edited by Minnemooseus, : Edit to try to bump links into click-ability.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by Minnemooseus, posted 12-15-2003 1:48 PM Minnemooseus has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 16 by Abshalom, posted 12-15-2003 11:53 PM Minnemooseus has responded

    
Minnemooseus
Member
Posts: 3749
From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior)
Joined: 11-11-2001
Member Rating: 3.0


Message 17 of 18 (73226)
12-16-2003 12:02 AM
Reply to: Message 16 by Abshalom
12-15-2003 11:53 PM


Hey, I gave you the radius of the earth, the volume of the oceans, and the formula relating diameter of a sphere to the volume of the sphere.

What more do you need?

Results seem about right, compared to the average depth of the oceans number.

We shall now all pause, so everyone can give deep consideration of the thought "Who cares".

Moose


This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by Abshalom, posted 12-15-2003 11:53 PM Abshalom has not yet responded

    
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019