Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Continental Bumper Cars
lpetrich
Inactive Member


Message 1 of 8 (30255)
01-26-2003 4:48 PM


Some creationists have claimed that Noah's Flood was followed by superfast continental drift, in which Pangaea broke up and its fragments moved to near their present positions in only a few centuries -- at most.
However, there is evidence that continents have been drifting and colliding and breaking up over the last few billion years, as if they are playing a game of "bumper cars".
Here is Chris Scotese's excellent site and Steven Dutch's drift-history page; they trace continental drift from the breakup of Rodinia, a Pangaea-like supercontinent, about 750 million years ago.
Rodinia had formed about a billion years ago from previous continents; these continents have been traced back to an earlier supercontinent of 1.5 billion years ago, Columbia.
There may have been an even older supercontinent, at about 2 billion years ago, but details on that are not very clear -- I recall it from somewhere.
But before that, the continents were relatively small, and they may not have a tendency to form supercontinents.
[This message has been edited by lpetrich, 01-26-2003]

Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by funkmasterfreaky, posted 01-26-2003 7:43 PM lpetrich has not replied
 Message 4 by TrueCreation, posted 01-27-2003 7:29 PM lpetrich has not replied

  
funkmasterfreaky
Inactive Member


Message 2 of 8 (30258)
01-26-2003 7:43 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by lpetrich
01-26-2003 4:48 PM


Maybe these were faster bumper cars than you have guessed?
------------------
Saved by an incredible Grace.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by lpetrich, posted 01-26-2003 4:48 PM lpetrich has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by Randy, posted 01-26-2003 9:55 PM funkmasterfreaky has not replied

  
Randy
Member (Idle past 6247 days)
Posts: 420
From: Cincinnati OH USA
Joined: 07-19-2002


Message 3 of 8 (30270)
01-26-2003 9:55 PM
Reply to: Message 2 by funkmasterfreaky
01-26-2003 7:43 PM


These runaway subduction galloping continent models have been discussed in detail before. See
http://EvC Forum: Creationist Baumgardner: one of the top mainstream mantle/plate tectonics simulators! -->EvC Forum: Creationist Baumgardner: one of the top mainstream mantle/plate tectonics simulators!
For example and of course there is recent discussion at
http://EvC Forum: Plate tectonics, mountain building, and the Flood -->EvC Forum: Plate tectonics, mountain building, and the Flood
The Baumgardner model uses galloping continents to drive the flood and while admitting that lots of heat is released, ignores the fact that it cooks the earth to death thousands of times over. Answers in Genesis specifically state that this continent movement drives the flood and that the division of the lands in the time of Peleg is political. There is no mechanism to move continents at these rates before during or after the flood except an ad hoc invocation of suddenly speeded up radioactive decay heating the mantle to get the enormous reduction in mantle viscosity required to get the process started and of course the process cooks the earth to death. There are also problems with the seafloor depth profiles as Joe Meert has pointed out and as is discussed on the other threads. There is no evidence for racing continents and plenty of evidence that it never happened.
Randy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by funkmasterfreaky, posted 01-26-2003 7:43 PM funkmasterfreaky has not replied

  
TrueCreation
Inactive Member


Message 4 of 8 (30368)
01-27-2003 7:29 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by lpetrich
01-26-2003 4:48 PM


The Pangean breakup is the one which we interpret as flood inducing. previous continental motion is attributed to the creation.
------------------

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by lpetrich, posted 01-26-2003 4:48 PM lpetrich has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 5 by funkmasterfreaky, posted 01-27-2003 8:22 PM TrueCreation has replied

  
funkmasterfreaky
Inactive Member


Message 5 of 8 (30375)
01-27-2003 8:22 PM
Reply to: Message 4 by TrueCreation
01-27-2003 7:29 PM


I kind of thought that maybe the pangean breakup was after the flood. Maybe the tower of babel?
Seems like an efficient way to scatter people across the globe?
Then again I'm no scientist.
------------------
Saved by an incredible Grace.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by TrueCreation, posted 01-27-2003 7:29 PM TrueCreation has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 6 by Randy, posted 01-27-2003 8:46 PM funkmasterfreaky has not replied
 Message 7 by TrueCreation, posted 01-27-2003 9:28 PM funkmasterfreaky has not replied

  
Randy
Member (Idle past 6247 days)
Posts: 420
From: Cincinnati OH USA
Joined: 07-19-2002


Message 6 of 8 (30378)
01-27-2003 8:46 PM
Reply to: Message 5 by funkmasterfreaky
01-27-2003 8:22 PM


quote:
I kind of thought that maybe the pangean breakup was after the flood. Maybe the tower of babel?
Seems like an efficient way to scatter people across the globe?
Some creationists claim one some the other. I have ever debated a few who used during the flood when convenient and post flood when convenient but I am sure no one posting here would do that. But I really don't think galloping continents is so efficient since it cooks the earth to death. I have read that the December 2002 issue of the "Creation Research Society Quarterly" has an article by YECs John K. Reed and Carl R. Froede, Jr that roasts Baumgardner's boiling flood model but I haven't seen it yet. Has anyone here seen it?
Randy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by funkmasterfreaky, posted 01-27-2003 8:22 PM funkmasterfreaky has not replied

  
TrueCreation
Inactive Member


Message 7 of 8 (30380)
01-27-2003 9:28 PM
Reply to: Message 5 by funkmasterfreaky
01-27-2003 8:22 PM


"I kind of thought that maybe the pangean breakup was after the flood. Maybe the tower of babel? "
--It is most reasonable scientifically to say that it was during the flood event, since it isn't just supported by scripture. (In regards to scripture, it may be a more ideal interpretation to say that the Tower of Babel "breakup" had to do with languages and the migration of the human population.
--It wasn't coincidence that the tectonic activity occurred during the flood, because it is this tectonic activity which caused continental inundation in the first place.
------------------

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by funkmasterfreaky, posted 01-27-2003 8:22 PM funkmasterfreaky has not replied

  
lpetrich
Inactive Member


Message 8 of 8 (30637)
01-30-2003 1:17 AM


There is a serious problem with the creationists' galloping-continents model -- how would the continents be lubricated? Would they be lubricated by subsurface melting? If so, then the upper mantle ought to still be melted, simply because of the time necessary for its heat to diffuse outward.
Also, if Pangaea is hard to fit into young-earthism, then previous supercontinents must be even harder to fit into young-earthism. Some of the evidence of their existence is old orogens, roots of mountain ranges; the ranges' mountains are now flattened as a result of slumping and erosion. Which must have been superfast if it had occurred in only a few centuries, let alone the single year of Noah's Flood.
So it ought to be very understandable if mainstream geologists consider Flood Geology comparable to the excrement of the male bovine.

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024