Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,916 Year: 4,173/9,624 Month: 1,044/974 Week: 3/368 Day: 3/11 Hour: 0/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Noah's Flood Came Down. It's Goin Back Up!!
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1497 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 192 of 247 (42386)
06-09-2003 2:44 AM
Reply to: Message 191 by Buzsaw
06-09-2003 1:39 AM


One link cited the whole southern hemisphere as getting hotter and dryer. That's hardly local.
True, but it's hardly global either, now is it? Even if it's getting hotter and dryer in the southern hemisphere, that just means it's getting more humid in the northern. Hence, record rain/snowfall in a lot of places that have never had that.
My mentioning the space ship this time around was a general statement to show that in rising, the space ship takes less power to move at higher speeds than it takes at lower altitudes and once in space it takes no power to keep it going. You all keep on keeping on ignoring the FACT that the higher vapor rises the more vapor it's going to take to maintain the same pressure at earth's surface, because there's less gravitational pull on it to bring it back the higher it gets, just as with the spacecraft. The spacecraft must use rocket power to lower itself back out of space orbit. Right?
Not to lower itself, to slow itself. We'll cover that in a bit.
2. If you want to respond to my above post objectively, please take each of my statements and refute them if you can rather than taking this space ship thing outa context and applying it to discredit my scientifically factural statements.
Actually, since gravity constitutes the bulk of your inference it's important to get this right, so we're going to stick with this until we feel you've grasped it. don't worry; I have the time.
A spaceship in orbit experiences as much gravitational tug as anything on the surface of the earth. Got that? It sounds weird, and contrary to "common sense" and popular depictions of space travel, but it's true. Being high up doesn't significantly reduce the Earth's gravitational tug. You have to be out beyond the orbit of the moon (some nearly 200,000 miles) before gravity is really weakened.
If you think about it, you already know this is true. That's why spaceships and satellites continue to orbit around the earth in a circle instead of shooting out in a straight line into deep space.
Ok, so gravity maintains as much of a pull on the spaceship in orbit as it does on the spaceship on the launch pad. What then keeps it up? Its intense speed. What maintains its speed? Inertia (the tendancy for an object in motion to remain in motion) and the lack of air friction outside the earth's atmosphere. This is stuff I covered several posts ago but you really don't show signs of having understood it.
You could orbit the Earth at a mile above the surface if there wasn't air friction to slow you down, because you'd have to maintain a speed of only about 8-9 miles a second. When there's no air, there's nothing to slow you down, so you don't have to expend fuel to maintain speed.
As for the leaving orbit, let me try to explain - I'm on a ship in orbit with the Earth whirling directly below me. How do I get back home? Not by firing my engines above me (pushing me down), but by firing them in front of me, to slow me down. As I lose speed my orbit decends (faster speeds mean higher orbits) until I hit the atmosphere, which slows me down even further (and heats me up, which is why I have all those heat-resistant re-entry tiles all over the bottom of my ship).
Are you getting this yet? Let me try and summarize:
Within the distance we're talking about, height above the earth does not decrease the earth's gravitational attraction. Spaceships are held up in orbit by intense speed, not by a weakening of gravity at that height. Therefore the height of the water vapor has nothing to do with how gravity pulls on it. Therefore you're very wrong about how much water the atmosphere can hold at reasonable temperatures.
Once more, just to be sure - how high you go has nothing at all to do with how much gravity pulls on you. Gravity pulls the same on a spaceship in orbit as on a spaceship parked in a hanger. Is this clear yet?
Plus don't forget that in my hypothesis, two miracle effecting men cause the rain not to fall, so if you want to discuss my hypothesis as I laid it out on day one, you've gotta factor that in.
If you're doing science, there's no way (or reason) to factor in the activites of two men who can do something that is impossible according to science. It's just not possible, so why is it relevant to a scientific discussion?
Regardless of what anybody says, if anything can be shown to exist, it's scientific to acknowledge it's existence. The fulfilled prophecies are actually more evidence that it exists than anything you have to prove the alleged fact of evolution.
I totally disagree. But I think this is a topic for another thread - if you'd like to start it. I mean, the evidence for your view is only one book - the bible. The evidence for ours fills a vast array of books, journals, and web pages, representing maybe 100 or 1000 times as much data as contained in your bible. By just that measure alone we have way more data.
And the supernatural has never been shown to exist. Every time it's tested it turns out to be wishful thinking, response bias, hallucination, or even simple fraud.
Now you're showing your ignorance in my field of expertise. The context favors highly my literal interpretation.
I'll freely admit to my ignorance. I'll take your word for it that the context doesn't support my interpretation as well as it may yours. But you didn't provide the context, did you? You provided just that line as support. And my interpretation is as well supported by that one line as your interpretation.
I don't think that bodes well for prophecy. We can't even agree on what that statement is a prophecy of.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 191 by Buzsaw, posted 06-09-2003 1:39 AM Buzsaw has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 194 by Buzsaw, posted 06-09-2003 3:03 AM crashfrog has not replied
 Message 195 by NosyNed, posted 06-09-2003 3:09 AM crashfrog has not replied

crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1497 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 196 of 247 (42396)
06-09-2003 3:20 AM
Reply to: Message 193 by Buzsaw
06-09-2003 2:51 AM


Faith and trust, by definition, go together like a horse and carriage. You can't have one without the other. This's silly time wasting nitpicking on your part.
No, it's a genuine mistake by Christians to equate trust and faith, but they aren't the same.
Trust is belief in someone or something because they've never let you down before. (Unless you regularly trust people that continually lie to you.)
Faith is belief in someone or something in spite of them letting you down.
I'm going to guess that God has not answered every single one of your prayers. You ahve prayed for things and not recieved them, yes? But you still have faith in god. Would you trust a bridge that collapsed the last time you drove over it?
They're two different things. You may trust god, and have faith in bridges, but those are different things from your faith in god and your trust in bridges. As for definitions, you might want to look those up before you shoot your mouth off about them.
Maybe you should look search "Carl Baugh" with "coal" and apprise yourself.
Most of the links I find are ones that debunk those artifacts.
It would if the atmosphere earth's air and the atmosphere were heated up to expand, become less dense and rise to a higher altitude.
NO, IT DOESN'T!
That's what we're trying to tell you. Gravity doesn't stop working because you're incrementally higher from the earth.
How about this link:
They're talking about local changes in barometric pressure. Any increase locally means there's a decrease somewhere else. The global pressure doesn't change. (Barometric pressure is not the same as atmospheric pressure because the two are caused by different things.)
Here's a thought experiment. Stand on two bathroom scales, a foot on each one. Lean to one side. Your weight goes up on that scale. Does that mean you weigh more? Of course not - it's simply a local change. Your "global" weight remains the same.
You think I'm real stupid, don't you? We're talking atmospheric psi here. Right? Well, I know there's not 14.7 psi on every cubic inch of air in the atmosphere, but the size, temperature, height, and density of the atmosphere do affect the atmospheric psi. (If the size is larger, I meant that means it's less dense and higher with less gravitational pull on it the higher it reaches.} Why can't you educated folk acknowledge those facts?
I don't even understand your point here, and I don't think you do either. Atmospheric pressure isn't exerted on the atmosphere, it's exerted by the atmosphere on things that are in the atmosphere. Again, these basic errors don't bode well for your ability to debate atmospheric change.
The ideal temperatures aren't at the equator. Try 70 to 80 degrees.
What, like Mexico? Or Florida? Where are you talking about? The warmer it is year-round, the more disease and parasites there are.
Also there was so much lush vegetation goodies to eat that meat wasn't eaten until after the flood according to the Bible. Folks were vegetarians for that reason, as the Bible indicates. They were healthy and lived loooong lives.
Then why did Noah and the other pre-flood people keep goats and sheep and cattle as livestock?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 193 by Buzsaw, posted 06-09-2003 2:51 AM Buzsaw has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 201 by Buzsaw, posted 06-09-2003 3:33 AM crashfrog has not replied

crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1497 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 199 of 247 (42400)
06-09-2003 3:31 AM
Reply to: Message 198 by Buzsaw
06-09-2003 3:27 AM


The above link supports my contention that enough heat spread over the earth will keep a canopy of vapor up.
No one's disputing this. It's just that the amount of water you're talking about would take enough heat to sterilize the Earth. Even granting you Ned's 9% reduction in gravitational attraction at that altitude.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 198 by Buzsaw, posted 06-09-2003 3:27 AM Buzsaw has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 202 by NosyNed, posted 06-09-2003 3:34 AM crashfrog has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024