Rahvin
Message 1Rahvin writes:
If you by some physics-violating miracle take all of the water in the ice caps, all of the water from underground, and all of the water in the atmosphere, you will still be over 21,000,000 km^3 short. That's about 1/4 of what we said was needed.
There is not enough water on the entire planet to Flood the Earth as claimed in the Bible, even ignoring mountains, giving an absurdly low average elevation for the continents, ignoring all of the facts that make taking all of the water on the planet out of the atmosphere and up from the ground and melting it from the ice caps completely impossible, and giving the Creationist side the most favorable measurements and assumptions possible. It's not even close.
Then in message [msg-19]
Rahvin writes:
Maybe the time will come when I will have that desire. Right now I am attempting to devote my time to other areas. Therefore, I would like to limit our discussion to the question of whether there was enough water for a global flood to have taken place, and the calculations that you made to attempt to prove your point. If you want to argue other points that refute the possibility of a global flood, then please let me bow out, and you do that with someone else.
Acceptable for now.
The quote is from Wumpini in [msg-16]
Wumpini expresses a desire to limit the discussion as to the question of whether there was enough water for a global flood to have taken place due to time restraints. Rahvin you agreed this was acceptable.
Rahvin writes:
If you by some physics-violating miracle take all of the water in the ice caps, all of the water from underground, and all of the water in the atmosphere, you will still be over 21,000,000 km^3 short. That's about 1/4 of what we said was needed.
So we need 3 more times that amount to do the job.
If the scientist are correct that Wumpini cited and there is at least 5 times as much water in the mantel as the oceans. That should be plenty of water to flood the earth as Wumpini's math shows in
Message 32
The only qualifiers I see to the access to water are: all of the water in the ice caps, all of the water from underground, and all of the water in the atmosphere,
Ravin your assertion that: "There is not enough water on the entire planet to Flood the Earth as claimed in the Bible,". Has been falsified.
Now you can claim special pleadings if you so desire. But you set the bounds of the discussion.
It did not include proving that the flood happened.
It did not even include that it had to be possible to happen.
Only that there had to be enough water to accomplish the flood as put forth in the Bible.
So you claim special pleadings as everybody else has that the water in the mantel is not available to add to what we have to cover the earth. Does your special pleadings mean that the water was never available? Does it mean the water does not exist?
But that was not what you stated in the OP.
You plainly stated there was not enough water in or on the planet to produce the flood.
Science says there is enough water to do the job and then quite a bit left over.
Just because there is enough water to flood the earth as stated in the Bible does not prove that it happened.
Now the creo tactic of changing playing fields.
Rahvin in message 60.
Hi Rahvin,
quote:
Rahvin writes:
You read about a discovery of water under the Earth in addition to the water I spoke of in my calculations, yes, but it's not available water.
I find ten times more water than you think is on the earth, and now you turn around and say you don't like my water. You say it is "not available." Well I know this is a science forum, but I assure you that all the water on this planet is available to God. Its His water.
Irrelevant. We need to see evidence of a Flood - even a Flood caused by a
deity should leave evidence for us to find just a few scant thousand years later (unless the deity specifically covered up this evidence, in which case arguing is moot). The
fact is that the water you have mentioned is dissolved in molten rock in the Earth's mantle. It's superheated to several times its boiling point, and it's highly pressurized. To bring that water to the surface, you'd need massive volcanism to transport the magma to the surface, you'd have massive explosions as the superheated water depressurized, and the heat from the water and the magma it's trapped in would parbroil the Earth. Did you happen to notice how much water is dissolved in the magma? Specifically, how much
magma contains all of that water? The magma will need to be massively depressurized in order to release its dissolved contents - which means catastrophic volcanism, releasing
incredible amounts of heat. Did you also notice what
else is dissolved in magma? There's a reason volcanologists don't tend to approach volcanic calderas - extremely toxic gasses are also dissolved in the molten rock. Your scenario would not only superheat the Earth, but also release massive amounts of toxic gasses into the atmosphere. As is typical of Creationist "theories" for the Flood, the water itself would be the
least of Noah's problems.
So now you are demanding that there be evidence of a flood.
According to your agreement with Wumpini all that had to be shown was there was enough water.
It was shown that science says there is enough water not just one group of scientist but two with ranges of 5 to 10 times the amount in the oceans above what we knew about already.
But nevermind it is ok for you guys to change the goalposts just not alright for Creo's to do it.
God Bless,
"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."
™ Version 4.2
