Does the evidence support the Flood? (attn: DwarfishSquints)

And on top of Mt Everest, as well - a couple of thousand feet of sediment that's made of fossil seashells. But all of it has been metamorphosed. That's a fancy way of saying that, after it was laid down under a sea somewhere, it was buried deeper than about five miles by other sediment and heated to somewhere over 600 degrees F, under very high pressure, so it could get converted from limestone to something approaching marble. And after that it was uplifted enough for those five+ miles of sediment to be eroded away, and then uplifted enough more to be six miles above our current sea level.All in 6000 years, do you really think?

---

"The wretched world lies now under the tyranny of foolishness; things are believed by Christians of such absurdity as no one ever could aforetime induce the heathen to believe." - Agobard of Lyons, ca. 830 AD

Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Totally off-topic message "whited out".

No, we don't. That is not at all where the evidence leads. The rocks that are now on top of Everest (or the mountains at Banff or Boulder) were the floor of a sea when they formed. They were near-horizontal ses-bottom. Under water, yes, but not mountains, and not even dreaming about mountains. The rocks that ended up on Everest went through the travails I outlined above before ending up on top of a mountain. And it would take more than a couple of miracles to do all that in a few thousand or a few hundred thousand years.

Ok...let's apply a pencil to this. Let's assume one pre-Noah seven-oceans'-worth of water at an average temperature of 20 degrees C. Then we'll evaporate an exactly equal volume of water from the upper mantle, where it's 700 degrees C at the very least.We can then calculate what we'll get on the basis of one gram of water at 20C mixing with one gram of steam (evaporated water) at 700 C. Do you see where this is heading, Wumpini?The heat capacity of steam is roughly 0.5 cal/deg/gram, and that of water 1 cal/deg/gram. So the temperature on just putting the two adjacent to each other, before anything else evaporates or condenses, is 185 C or 333 F. Liquid water at 333F at atmospheric pressure? No, I think. And no, even an ark of gopher wood is not going to tolerate a world-wide ocean that warm.Yeah, the water from the Fountains could be "cooled by the oceans" - to some temperature well above boiling. I don't think that helps your scenario much, though.

---

"The wretched world lies now under the tyranny of foolishness; things are believed by Christians of such absurdity as no one ever could aforetime induce the heathen to believe." - Agobard of Lyons, ca. 830 AD

Ah, no. The (present-day) ocean weighs over 250 times as much as the atmosphere, and water has a higher heat capacity. The mass of your bowl of soup is less than the mass of air in your room by a factor of fifty or more, unless you use an enormous bowl or have a very small room. (Air weighs about 1.3 kg per cubic meter). So the atmosphere will heat up with the oceans, and the oceans won't cool noticeably. 150 days is no time at all in this context, either. The only way to lose that much heat is radiation into space. And that ocean floor is about 3 kilometers above the mantle, where things are much hotter. And the water that comes from black smoker vents is, in any case, not water from the mantle. It's overwhelmingly ocean water that's circulating through fracture systems and being heated by hot rocks. OK. Noah only had to contend with 300F oceans, not 330F.

I repeat: the top 2000 feet or so of Mt Everest is made up of seashells and such. But it's all been baked at 500 degrees C or so under many, many atmospheres of pressure.How did that happen during or since some Flood in the last six millenia?

---

"The wretched world lies now under the tyranny of foolishness; things are believed by Christians of such absurdity as no one ever could aforetime induce the heathen to believe." - Agobard of Lyons, ca. 830 AD

It may well be that there is enough water in the upper mantle to cover Mt Everest plus 15 more cubits. But, as has been mentioned here several times already, it doesn't help your deity drown all but eight folks! That water could as easily be on Mars, for at least three reasons:
1) if it was in the mantle, it's at about 700 Celsius.
2) if it was in the mantle, it's trapped in and below rocks with permeability to water no greater than, and almost certainly much less than, the reservoirs that we produce oil and gas from. That can't get you three ocean's worth of water in forty days. If it could, refer to #1.
3) how do you disappear three oceans of water in the time your book tells us the waters had to "asswage?"Yes, if you had a driving force to bring all that water to surface, and if you could condense it all from superheated steam back to water, perhaps there really is that much water under the rocks. But it just ain't happening in 40 days. Or 40 years. Or 40 centuries.Added by edit: What does that word "lower" signify there, d'ya think? Wump? Icant? Anyone?Edited by Coragyps, : add a bit

There that "lower mantle" term is again, more than once! Hmm, what could it mean? - Wikipedia, Mantle (geology) - WikipediaLessee.....670 km is over 400 miles, all of it rock. And the temperature there is around 1900K or 3000F. How are we transporting and cooling that water, again?

Sure it is - most easily in this context by bringing that 700 to 1700-degree C mineral up near surface, where the pressure is less. The problem then returns to all that heat from the hot rocks themselves, and from the steam that flashed off them, and from the heat of that steam condensing to water.Ca(OH)2 + heat ---> CaO + H2O is a simple example that converts "hydrated lime" to "quicklime" - and with only hydroxyls in the starting compound.Edited by Coragyps, : No reason given.

---

"The wretched world lies now under the tyranny of foolishness; things are believed by Christians of such absurdity as no one ever could aforetime induce the heathen to believe." - Agobard of Lyons, ca. 830 AD

You didn't - but wouldn't your Flood need to be when humans were around? That's only been a couple hundred thousand years.

---

"The wretched world lies now under the tyranny of foolishness; things are believed by Christians of such absurdity as no one ever could aforetime induce the heathen to believe." - Agobard of Lyons, ca. 830 AD

You may think that all you please, but you have no evidence of them, right? Or if you do, you'll open a thread to show it to us? Or, better, publish it in Nature?

---

"The wretched world lies now under the tyranny of foolishness; things are believed by Christians of such absurdity as no one ever could aforetime induce the heathen to believe." - Agobard of Lyons, ca. 830 AD

Uh.....Lucy? My part of West Texas isn't knee deep - it's a couple of miles deep in exoskeletons of sponges and corals and all sorts of sea critters that had calcium carbonate parts. That didn't get there in 150 days. It didn't all get there in 150 millenia. It takes a long time to grow a single reef 120 miles long and 600 feet or more thick - and there's one like that a mile below my house.

---

"The wretched world lies now under the tyranny of foolishness; things are believed by Christians of such absurdity as no one ever could aforetime induce the heathen to believe." - Agobard of Lyons, ca. 830 AD

Beg pardon? Can you name a river that flows "at the bottom of the oceans?" Have you ever heard of a river delta, or, say, looked at a map? Rivers flow to oceans, and typically build up big piles of sediment on the ocean's edge. A junior-high science book will explain it pretty clearly.

---

"The wretched world lies now under the tyranny of foolishness; things are believed by Christians of such absurdity as no one ever could aforetime induce the heathen to believe." - Agobard of Lyons, ca. 830 AD

Could you show me how these to statements can me made to fit together, given the fairly well-known tendencies of plants and animals to die at temperatures over boiling? Even gopher wood would tend to weaken after a 40-day boil, don't you imagine?You aren't operating rationally.You're Making Stuff Up.

---

"The wretched world lies now under the tyranny of foolishness; things are believed by Christians of such absurdity as no one ever could aforetime induce the heathen to believe." - Agobard of Lyons, ca. 830 AD

Lucy, how about making these two statements of yours mesh, then: If you're vaporising the freakin' ocean, the atmosphere will all be above 100C by a considerable margin. The oceans outweigh the air by a few hundredfold. That's the beginning of what's wrong with your "rationale." The scenario is absurd in that it only looks at one or two of the bits of information available. That's what's wrong with it.