Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 57 (9173 total)
0 online now:
Newest Member: Neptune7
Post Volume: Total: 917,585 Year: 4,842/9,624 Month: 190/427 Week: 103/85 Day: 8/2 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Evidence for a recent flood
jar
Member
Posts: 34051
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 316 of 404 (642542)
11-29-2011 4:34 PM
Reply to: Message 314 by ICANT
11-29-2011 4:07 PM


Re: looking at the likely reagion's geography
Bullshit, nothing but bullshit.
Both cavediver and Son Guku can and have provided you with tons of evidence of both that there was a Big Bang and of when it happened.
Now it is time for you to stop just sholvelin shit and actually provide some evidence.
When was the flood?
What evidence do you have of that flood?

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 314 by ICANT, posted 11-29-2011 4:07 PM ICANT has not replied

  
Trixie
Member (Idle past 3785 days)
Posts: 1011
From: Edinburgh
Joined: 01-03-2004


Message 317 of 404 (642545)
11-29-2011 4:55 PM
Reply to: Message 315 by Percy
11-29-2011 4:30 PM


Re: Back of an envelope calculation.
So that's roughly the same, is it not? I have trouble with UK billions and USA billions, so I avoid them all like the plague.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 315 by Percy, posted 11-29-2011 4:30 PM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 318 by Percy, posted 11-29-2011 7:20 PM Trixie has not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22607
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 4.8


Message 318 of 404 (642567)
11-29-2011 7:20 PM
Reply to: Message 317 by Trixie
11-29-2011 4:55 PM


Re: Back of an envelope calculation.
Oh, right, Edinburgh, didn't think. Yes, our answers were very close.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 317 by Trixie, posted 11-29-2011 4:55 PM Trixie has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 363 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 319 of 404 (642582)
11-29-2011 8:25 PM
Reply to: Message 313 by Trixie
11-29-2011 4:04 PM


Re: Back of an envelope calculation.
Using the radius of the Earth I've calculated the volume, then using the radius plus 4000 metres I calculated it again (Everest is approx 8000 metres). The difference between the second figure and the first figure gave me the volume of water required to cover the Earth's surface completely.
Why did you divide the height of Everest by two?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 313 by Trixie, posted 11-29-2011 4:04 PM Trixie has not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 320 of 404 (642585)
11-29-2011 10:02 PM
Reply to: Message 315 by Percy
11-29-2011 4:30 PM


Re: Back of an envelope calculation.
Just to add to the confusion.
It would have been a little easier to estimate the volume of water using the surface area of a sphere times the elevation of Mt Everest above see level.
So H*4*pi*R^2 = 4*pi* (6.4*10^3 kilometers)^2 *(8.800 kilometers)
= 4.5 * 10^9 cubic kilometers
I'm not sure why you are using 4 kilometers for the height of Mt. Everest. Wiki gives 8.85 kilometers.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 315 by Percy, posted 11-29-2011 4:30 PM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 321 by Percy, posted 11-29-2011 10:15 PM NoNukes has seen this message but not replied
 Message 324 by Trixie, posted 11-30-2011 5:11 AM NoNukes has seen this message but not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22607
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 4.8


Message 321 of 404 (642587)
11-29-2011 10:15 PM
Reply to: Message 320 by NoNukes
11-29-2011 10:02 PM


Re: Back of an envelope calculation.
Oh, a better way - it didn't occur to me.
I think Trixie used 4 km to err on the side of making it easier for creationists to find a source of the water, I think because some creationists claim the flood did cover all mountains, and some don't.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 320 by NoNukes, posted 11-29-2011 10:02 PM NoNukes has seen this message but not replied

  
ICANT
Member (Idle past 106 days)
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007


Message 322 of 404 (642592)
11-30-2011 12:08 AM
Reply to: Message 312 by Percy
11-29-2011 3:51 PM


Re: looking at the likely reagion's geography
Hi Percy,
Percy writes:
The question for you is, where is the evidence that this water ever left the mantle,
Who said it did?
We agree that it is there, so how and when did it get there?
An omniscient God would have provided the water for the fountains of the deep as He knew in advance that He would cause a flood to destroy all life forms that breathed the breath of life.
The water would have been available to flood the Earth.
Where did our water come from?
That is a mystery, but it is thought to have come to Earth from outer space by way of objects crashing into Earth shortly after its formation.
Thus the question how did it get into the mantle?
As jar has repeated so many times water runs downhill, and I add unless it is going uphill as from springs, artisian wells, or the fountains of the deep.
The water that was delivered to the Earth by whatever means had to migrate into the mantle. From what I understand that happens by subduction, when one plate dives beneath another plate.
Since there is enough water in the mantle to cover the Earth many times where was it before it entered the mantle?
But I have a problem with water migrating to the mantel.
As I read about oil production in the Gulf of Mexico from 30,000 feet down when the drill breaks through to where the oil is the oil will come to the top of the pipe at the drilling rig due to the pressure the oil is under.
Now if there was pools of water in the same area as the oil is in and that pool of water was released it would find the surface pretty quick.
But the main thing is there is at least 30,000 feet of materal that water can be stored in without being in the mantle.
Percy writes:
And where is the evidence that the water eventually left the surface and somehow became distributed back into the mantle?
If all the Earth's water came from outer space as put forth it had to get into the mantle at some point in Earth's history as it is there today.
Percy writes:
Water plays a key lubrication role in tectonic movements,
Are you saying the water in the mantle plays a key role in plate movement?
I was under the impression there was e lithosphere which is the outer solid part of the earth, with the asthenosphere that lubricates plate motions underneath it, then the upper mantle and lower mantle.
Percy writes:
The water content of subducting plates also plays a key role in forming rising bubbles of magma that are responsible for the formation of volcanoes when they reach the surface,
You are refering to the plume theory which cannot account for all occurrences of the type of volcanism it was devised to explain.
But I didn't know that the water in the mantle had anything to do with the plume as hypothetically it starts in the outer core, and extends upwards under the mantle raising the mantle and sometimes exiting accounting for volcanic regions separate from those of plate tectonics.
Percy writes:
so we should see a reduction of this process at depths that correspond to the period of the flood.
Why would you see a reduction in the plume's trying to get out of the outer core?
I raised one point about the water getting into the mantel and how it got there. I have a suggestion. It got there when the Earth was divided because it took a lot of water to cool the plates and especially the asthenosphere. Just a thought.

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 312 by Percy, posted 11-29-2011 3:51 PM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 323 by Pressie, posted 11-30-2011 4:51 AM ICANT has not replied
 Message 325 by Percy, posted 11-30-2011 7:55 AM ICANT has replied

  
Pressie
Member
Posts: 2103
From: Pretoria, SA
Joined: 06-18-2010


(1)
Message 323 of 404 (642603)
11-30-2011 4:51 AM
Reply to: Message 322 by ICANT
11-30-2011 12:08 AM


Re: looking at the likely reagion's geography
ICANT writes:
I raised one point about the water getting into the mantel and how it got there. I have a suggestion. It got there when the Earth was divided because it took a lot of water to cool the plates and especially the asthenosphere. Just a thought.
We have evidence that you are wrong.
Water got into the mantle by quite a few ways, actually. It first happened when the original molten earth started cooling and rocks started forming. Water was not only trapped in minerals when the original molten earth cooled, they also formed part of the rocks.
Chemical reactions and minerals are wonderful things. They exist and we can study them (I know the word 'study' is foreign to creationists and that you won’t understand it, but people actually can study rocks!). I hope you know that the asthenosphere consists of ductile rocks?
Oh, and by the way. The topic of this thread is 'Evidence for a recent flood'. As this is a science forum, ramblings about how you think water got into the asthenosphere is not evidence for a flood. It has nothing to do with it.
We have evidence for water in the asthenosphere. We have evidence on how it got there and still gets there. No global flood involved.
I take it that you have no evidence for a recent global flood at all, but you just believe it because of an old book?
Edited by Pressie, : Added last sentence
Edited by Pressie, : Changed sentences

This message is a reply to:
 Message 322 by ICANT, posted 11-30-2011 12:08 AM ICANT has not replied

  
Trixie
Member (Idle past 3785 days)
Posts: 1011
From: Edinburgh
Joined: 01-03-2004


Message 324 of 404 (642604)
11-30-2011 5:11 AM
Reply to: Message 320 by NoNukes
11-29-2011 10:02 PM


Re: Back of an envelope calculation.
Percy is correct. I used half the height of Everest to get a middling figure, given that some do argue that the mountains were not as high before the flood.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 320 by NoNukes, posted 11-29-2011 10:02 PM NoNukes has seen this message but not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22607
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 4.8


(1)
Message 325 of 404 (642615)
11-30-2011 7:55 AM
Reply to: Message 322 by ICANT
11-30-2011 12:08 AM


Re: looking at the likely reagion's geography
ICANT writes:
Percy writes:
The question for you is, where is the evidence that this water ever left the mantle,
Who said it did?
You did, unless you're still making things up instead of arguing from evidence. In Message 309 you said:
ICANT in Message 309 writes:
There is enough water beneath the crust of the Earth to fill our oceans from 5 to 10 times depending on who you are reading beind.
You're right, there is a great deal of water in the mantle (that's what's beneath the crust), and it is contained within the rocks. That's what we have evidence for.
But this? This we have no evidence for:
An omniscient God would have provided the water for the fountains of the deep as He knew in advance that He would cause a flood to destroy all life forms that breathed the breath of life.
I again return your attention to the first word in the title of this thread: EVIDENCE.
Do you have evidence for anything you're claiming? If so, could you please describe it?
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 322 by ICANT, posted 11-30-2011 12:08 AM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 326 by ICANT, posted 11-30-2011 11:04 AM Percy has replied

  
ICANT
Member (Idle past 106 days)
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007


Message 326 of 404 (642635)
11-30-2011 11:04 AM
Reply to: Message 325 by Percy
11-30-2011 7:55 AM


Re: looking at the likely reagion's geography
Hi Percy,
Percy writes:
ICANT writes:
Percy writes:
The question for you is, where is the evidence that this water ever left the mantle,
Who said it did?
You did, unless you're still making things up instead of arguing from evidence. In Message 309 you said:
ICANT in Message 309 writes:
There is enough water beneath the crust of the Earth to fill our oceans from 5 to 10 times depending on who you are reading beind.
So by saying there is enough water beneath the crust of the Earth to fill our oceans 5 to 10 times you assume I am saying that water came to the surface and flooded the world in the flood of Noah and then went back into the mantle.
That is jumping to conclusion and putting words in my mouth.
I made a statement of fact according to what I read scientist have said.
I am saying the water is there now.
The question is how did that water get there?
The water that is in the mantle would be under great presure which would exceed the gravatational pull on the water, as evidenced when a drill hits a pocket of oil in the litosphere under the waters of the ocean.
My question to you was how did that water get there?
There are only so many plates that exist and one has to dive under another to cause subduction so there is only about 6 places that the water could get into the mantle but it is throughout the mantle.
The lithosphere is from 6 miles to 50 miles thick and sets on top of the asthenosphere which is up to 150 miles thick.
The asthenosphere has a lot of liquid in it.
The lithosphere has a lot of liquid in it, including trillions of barrels of oil.
I live in Florida and Google earth says my back yard is 49 feet above sea level. I can take a backhoe and dig a hole 30 foot deep in my back yard today and by tomorrow morning it will have 10 feet of water in it.
If Florida was still covered with water as it was in the past would that water that is in the lithosphere in my back yard disappear?
I think not.
That leads me to believe that the litosphere that is under water has water in it also. This is the water that would have came to the surface when the fountains of the deep were opened up. Whether it would be saline water or fresh water would be irrelavant. I can drill a hole in my back yard to around 300 feet and get saline water.
There is water in the asthenosphere as this is what is supposed to cool the plates providing lubrication to allow movement for the continents to move.
You seem to be arguing that there is no water that is available in the lithosphere that is covered by water, is that your argument?
Percy writes:
You're right, there is a great deal of water in the mantle (that's what's beneath the crust), and it is contained within the rocks. That's what we have evidence for.
Are you including the lithosphere and the asthenosphere which is at least 6 to 100 miles thick in the crust?
They do exist before you get to the mantle.
Are you saying there is no water in the lithosphere and the asthenosphere under the sea?
All of our groundwater is in the lithosphere according to what I can find. None of the charts list the amount of water in the asthenospher under our dry land. That is amazing because it has to have water in it if the mantle under it has water in 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."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 325 by Percy, posted 11-30-2011 7:55 AM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 327 by Taq, posted 11-30-2011 11:27 AM ICANT has not replied
 Message 328 by Percy, posted 11-30-2011 11:32 AM ICANT has not replied
 Message 329 by edge, posted 12-02-2011 12:14 AM ICANT has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 10158
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 4.7


(1)
Message 327 of 404 (642640)
11-30-2011 11:27 AM
Reply to: Message 326 by ICANT
11-30-2011 11:04 AM


Re: looking at the likely reagion's geography
There are only so many plates that exist and one has to dive under another to cause subduction so there is only about 6 places that the water could get into the mantle but it is throughout the mantle.
The mantle is not static:
Differences in temperature create convection currents which drives both plate movement (along with cold slab pull) and distribution of water within the mantle.
That leads me to believe that the litosphere that is under water has water in it also. This is the water that would have came to the surface when the fountains of the deep were opened up.
How do you flood the world with water that is in natural aquifers? What energy source is moving the water out of the rock? We humans have to use pumps to pull water out of aquifers. Also, as you remove water it will just pull more water back in to replace it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 326 by ICANT, posted 11-30-2011 11:04 AM ICANT has not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22607
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 4.8


(1)
Message 328 of 404 (642642)
11-30-2011 11:32 AM
Reply to: Message 326 by ICANT
11-30-2011 11:04 AM


Re: looking at the likely reagion's geography
Hi ICANT,
The key question, the one repeatedly being asked of you over and over in this thread, is do you have evidence of anything you are claiming. If so then please present it. If not then you really shouldn't be posting to this thread.
My best guess now of what you believe is that the water for the fountains of the deep was placed there by God during creation, and that after the flood it became distributed throughout the mantle. If this is correct, great, if not then please make a clear statement of your view of what happened.
But once you have clearly described your views then the next step is to provide evidence. If you have no evidence then you really shouldn't be posting to this thread. If you think you are justified in posting without evidence because the Big Bang has no evidence, then you still shouldn't be posting to this thread, just on the principle of two wrongs don't make a right and without consideration of whether you're right about evidence for the Big Bang.
Please stop using ambiguity and vagueness to distract attention from the thread's topic: Evidence for a recent flood
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 326 by ICANT, posted 11-30-2011 11:04 AM ICANT has not replied

  
edge
Member (Idle past 1785 days)
Posts: 4696
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002


Message 329 of 404 (642824)
12-02-2011 12:14 AM
Reply to: Message 326 by ICANT
11-30-2011 11:04 AM


Re: looking at the likely reagion's geography
So by saying there is enough water beneath the crust of the Earth to fill our oceans 5 to 10 times you assume I am saying that water came to the surface and flooded the world in the flood of Noah and then went back into the mantle.
That is jumping to conclusion and putting words in my mouth.
I made a statement of fact according to what I read scientist have said.
I am saying the water is there now.
The question is how did that water get there?
The real question is what do you think this has to do with a biblical flood and why?
The water that is in the mantle would be under great presure...
There is no 'water', per se... only hydrated minerals.
... which would exceed the gravatational pull on the water, as evidenced when a drill hits a pocket of oil in the litosphere under the waters of the ocean.
You mean the pressure would exdeed hydrostatic. Well, that's not surprsing since the water is not actually free. But how would you get it to dissociate and then expand?
Are you sure you want to compare an overpressured oil reservoir with hydrated minerals?
My question to you was how did that water get there?
Chemical reaction, likely in the area of a subduction zone.
There are only so many plates that exist and one has to dive under another to cause subduction so there is only about 6 places that the water could get into the mantle but it is throughout the mantle.
Actually, the presence of 'water' in the mantle is not homogeneous. It is higher over subduction zones.
The lithosphere is from 6 miles to 50 miles thick and sets on top of the asthenosphere which is up to 150 miles thick.
The asthenosphere has a lot of liquid in it.
Actually, not. The asthenospher is plastic, not liquid.
The lithosphere has a lot of liquid in it, including trillions of barrels of oil.
And how is all of this relevant?
That leads me to believe that the litosphere that is under water has water in it also. This is the water that would have came to the surface when the fountains of the deep were opened up.
Why?
And how?
Whether it would be saline water or fresh water would be irrelavant. I can drill a hole in my back yard to around 300 feet and get saline water.
As you said. This is irrelevant.
There is water in the asthenosphere as this is what is supposed to cool the plates providing lubrication to allow movement for the continents to move.
Please explain.
You seem to be arguing that there is no water that is available in the lithosphere that is covered by water, is that your argument?
Never occurred to me. Do you imagine that there was? How would you displace that water?
Are you including the lithosphere and the asthenosphere which is at least 6 to 100 miles thick in the crust?
Including it for what? This is our model.
They do exist before you get to the mantle.
Again, irrelevant. But also, technically not correct. At least part of the lithosphere is mantle and the asthenosphere is within the mantle.
Are you saying there is no water in the lithosphere and the asthenosphere under the sea?
I don't think so. I can only speak for myself, but I'm saying that there is no liquid water in the asthenosphere except possibly what finds its way into the volcanic arcs. I'm also saying that there is probably water in the upper parts of the lithosphere, but not in the mantle portion. Furthermore, the presence of water in the crustal and supracrustal rocks would have to be displaced in order to participate in a global flood.
All of our groundwater is in the lithosphere according to what I can find.
And only in the most shallow parts at that.
None of the charts list the amount of water in the asthenospher under our dry land. That is amazing because it has to have water in it if the mantle under it has water in it.
Please document these charts. And, no, I repeat that there is no liquid water in those areas.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 326 by ICANT, posted 11-30-2011 11:04 AM ICANT has not replied

  
Portillo
Member (Idle past 4240 days)
Posts: 258
Joined: 11-14-2010


Message 330 of 404 (643725)
12-11-2011 12:58 AM
Reply to: Message 76 by Panda
10-24-2011 6:31 AM


quote:
This implies that floods no longer occur, which is clearly not true.
You claim that the creation of fossils requires that animals are laid down by water and buried quickly.
And that is what floods do.
But you then claim that fossilisation no longer happens ("we don't find fossils of animals today").
Can you explain how floods can bury animals quickly but fossils are no longer created?
In 1912, the Titanic sank. 1500 people went to the bottom of the ocean, 11,000 feet down. Many years later, someone went down with cameras and floodlights and found the ship. Broken in half and half a mile apart. They found thousands of pots, pans and other stuff scattered all over the ocean floor. But not 1 human, bone or skull was found. Why not? Because nothing that dies in the ocean is ever seen again. It is annihilated by scavengers. Not one fossil is formed in any ocean basin in the world today. Nature/Gods amazingly effective way of keeping the ocean basins from becoming garbage dumps.
And the same is true on land. No fossil is being formed on land today. Hordes of millions of buffalo bisons roamed the western praires and when they died they didnt go down and become fossils. The flesh was removed by scavengers and the bones disintegrated and turned to dust. Not one fossil of these buffalos has ever been found. But if you start digging down into the western prairies, what do you find? Fossils. They got there by being smashed by masses of mud in a global catastrophe. Instantaneously smashed and preserved.
Edited by Portillo, : No reason given.

And the conspiracy was strong, for the people increased continually - 2 Samuel 15:12

This message is a reply to:
 Message 76 by Panda, posted 10-24-2011 6:31 AM Panda has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 331 by Dr Adequate, posted 12-12-2011 12:57 AM Portillo has not replied
 Message 332 by Pressie, posted 12-12-2011 1:16 AM Portillo has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024