Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 86 (8926 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 08-22-2019 5:16 AM
23 online now:
AZPaul3, PaulK (2 members, 21 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: Jedothek
Post Volume:
Total: 860,204 Year: 15,240/19,786 Month: 1,963/3,058 Week: 337/404 Day: 4/51 Hour: 0/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev1
2
Author Topic:   Do oceans of water in mantle rock prove the flood?
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16097
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 83 of 108 (729795)
06-19-2014 6:31 AM
Reply to: Message 82 by Faith
06-19-2014 5:58 AM


Re: From the "on/off-topic fuzzy" zone
Neither answered the question before and they don't answer it now either. In 35 you are emphasizing the fact that the water is not in water form, and yet my sources recently quoted do suggest that it does have or can revert to a watery form under certain circumstances. I get your point about the pressure too but what about the situation where there is space for the water to flow into at that depth? What happens to the water then?

You mean, if there was a 400 mile deep hole in the ground? Then if you threw water down it, it would boil on the way down and come back up as steam. Also I suspect the hole would immediately turn into a volcano or otherwise close itself up. (What would happen if there was a mile deep hole in the sea?)

It's hard to do things against pressure. The tires of your car, for example, have a pressure of about 250 KPa, two and a half times atmospheric pressure. So you can't just open the valve of the tire and wait for air from outside to flow in, because it won't. That's thermodynamics for you. Instead, you need a machine that pumps air in by artificially creating a higher pressure outside than inside. The machine needs a power source. This is not the sort of thing that happens by itself.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 82 by Faith, posted 06-19-2014 5:58 AM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 84 by Faith, posted 06-19-2014 6:37 AM Dr Adequate has not yet responded

  
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16097
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 85 of 108 (729797)
06-19-2014 6:48 AM
Reply to: Message 82 by Faith
06-19-2014 5:58 AM


Re: From the "on/off-topic fuzzy" zone
To form ringwoodite from olivine DOES REQUIRE WATER, does it not? I mean it is formed FROM water. So there had to be that much water available to form that much ringwoodite from the olivine. The question is how it came to be that there was that much water at that depth?

Well, a creationist answer might be that God magicked it there when he magicked the rest of the Earth into being.

For a non-creationist answer, see post #41. The Earth, astronomers say, accreted. We know that there's plenty of ice in the solar system, e.g. comets. So chunks of ice would have got squidged into the mix.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 82 by Faith, posted 06-19-2014 5:58 AM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 86 by Faith, posted 06-19-2014 7:01 AM Dr Adequate has responded

  
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16097
Joined: 07-20-2006


(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

  
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16097
Joined: 07-20-2006


(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

  
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16097
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 106 of 108 (732524)
07-08-2014 12:21 AM
Reply to: Message 105 by Dedit
07-07-2014 11:45 PM


There's a lot of nonsense in there.

Take this one.

This rapid cooling of the surface of the core would result in rapid reversals of the earth’s magnetic field.

These magnetic reversals would have been expressed at the earth’s surface and been recorded in the zebra-shaped magnetic stripes in the new ocean-floor rocks. This magnetization would have been erratic and locally patchy, laterally as well as at depth, unlike the pattern expected in the slow-and-gradual version. It was predicted that similar records of “astonishingly rapid” magnetic reversals ought to be present in thin continental lava flows, and such astonishingly rapid reversals in continental lava flows were subsequently found.

Now this is just equivocation. What they need is short --- incredibly short --- intervals between the reversals. What they have is a couple of (real) scientists saying that the reversals themselves are quick.

It's like someone trying to compress American history into a few weeks by saying, yes, we've had 44 Presidents, but the process (inauguration) where we change from one President to another only takes a few hours. And -then they say, "See, our American-history-only-takes-a-few-weeks model predicts that inaugurations should be quick. Behold the awesome predictive power of our theory!"


This message is a reply to:
 Message 105 by Dedit, posted 07-07-2014 11:45 PM Dedit has not yet responded

  
Prev1
2
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019