The Global Flood as You've Never Seen It!

TheOutsider

Pope Iason Ouabache the Obscure
Dec 29, 2006
2,747
202
Indiana
✟11,428.00
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Married
My feeling is that given a higher pressure in the atmosphere due to a ice crystal canopy would counteract such supposed problems. The reality is that there are indications that "mountains" did not exist prior to the FLOOD. The Bible calls them high hills, though some translations read mountains. It is likely that the mountains seen today were memorial monuments to Noah and his family of the severity of the FLOOD.... The research simply is not there yet. And those who could do such are far too interested in EVOLUTION.

What hold the ozone in space? I don't know. No experimentation has been done by anyone.
Wow.. just, wow. I don't even know where to start.
 
Upvote 0

atomweaver

Senior Member
Nov 3, 2006
1,706
181
"Flat Raccoon", Connecticut
✟10,391.00
Faith
Agnostic
Politics
US-Democrat
What hold the ozone in space? I don't know.

Non sequitur, LittleNipper. The forces required to hold parts per million of a transient gaseous species in the stratosphere are nowhere near the forces required to create and hold overhead a hollow, spherical mass of water sufficient in volume to do what the Bible proposes (leaving aside that lack of geological evidence for a global flood for the moment).

No experimentation has been done by anyone.

no experimentation on an ice canopy, or no experimentation on atmospheric retention forces? If the latter, you are wrong.

Google Scholar search "atmospheric retention forces"
~33,800 hits in 0.14 seconds


If the former, well no experimentation is being done, because canopy theory is not viable (nor sane, for that matter). Even your AIG Overseers dislike it;

http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/dont_use.asp

see 3/4ths of the way down for "Canopy theory"
 
Upvote 0

TeddyKGB

A dude playin' a dude disgused as another dude
Jul 18, 2005
6,495
453
46
Deep underground
✟8,993.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
For the especially evil amongst you (read: IIDB members), Brown's Hydroplate Hypothesis has been having its metaphorical ass handed to it via an electronic beatdown of one of Brown's sycophants.

Aside: For some reason, I get measurable pleasure from seeing "Hydroplate" flagged by the spell-checker.
 
Upvote 0

BrainHertz

Senior Member
Nov 5, 2007
564
28
Oregon
✟8,340.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
My feeling is that given a higher pressure in the atmosphere due to a ice crystal canopy would counteract such supposed problems.

Well, as long as you have a feeling about it we're halfway to an actual proof. My feeling is that 40 feet of water would increase atmospheric pressure quite a bit.


The reality is that there are indications that "mountains" did not exist prior to the FLOOD.

:eek:

The Bible calls them high hills, though some translations read mountains. It is likely that the mountains seen today were memorial monuments to Noah and his family of the severity of the FLOOD....

:eek: :eek:

The research simply is not there yet. And those who could do such are far too interesed in EVOLUTION.

Hate to ask, but if you're interested, why don't you do it? If the only problem is that nobody has bothered to do the research, what's stopping you from stepping up to the plate? You could make a name for yourself.
 
Upvote 0

corvus_corax

Naclist Hierophant and Prophet
Jan 19, 2005
5,588
333
Oregon
✟14,911.00
Faith
Seeker
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
My feeling is that given a higher pressure in the atmosphere due to a ice crystal canopy would counteract such supposed problems.
Well, feelings are all well and good
I feel that the trees on my property have spirits, as do the rocks and other items. Now, given Im an animist. However, you will never find me arguing animism based on my feelings.
Such an argument is........well.........gosh I dont have a nice word for it beyond "stupidity"
The reality is that there are indications that "mountains" did not exist prior to the FLOOD.
Please provide empirical objective physical evidence that no mountains existed prior to 4000 (or heck, let's go back to 6000) years ago.
The Bible calls them high hills, though some translations read mountains.
So, apparently you aren't a KJVO like AV1611VET?
So who is correct, who's interpretation is correct?
BTW, the hebrew har is translated as hill, mountain, hill country, mount.
Now please define mountain, and explain how that differs from "high hill"
And keep in mind that if you use a Websters (or other english dictionary), you will be just as confused as you would be if you tried to differentiate between hill, mountain, hill country, mount in the original hebrew.
I.E- A mountain is a landform that extends above the surrounding terrain in a limited area. A mountain is generally steeper than a hill, but there is no universally accepted standard definition for the height of a mountain or a hill although a mountain usually has an identifiable summit.

a landmass that projects conspicuously above its surroundings and is higher than a hill

Hill (from the last source)-
a usually rounded natural elevation of land lower than a mountain

So, it's all a matter of elevation, isn't it?

So what elevation defines a mountain (vs a hill)? C'mon you can give us either the Hebrew or the modern definitions. You can do it, can't you LN?

It is likely that the mountains seen today were memorial monuments to Noah and his family of the severity of the FLOOD
Likely?
Please just admit that you are doing nothing more than adding your non-scirptural interpretation to the bible.
Why do I say this?
Because I see nowhere in the Tanakh where your "likelihood" is stated.
The research simply is not there yet. And those who could do such are far too interesed in EVOLUTION.
AH, so you finally admit that those who COULD do such research are "evolutionists" and not creationists

Thanks for your honesty (as long coming as it has been)
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

LittleNipper

Contributor
Mar 9, 2005
9,011
173
MOUNT HOLLY, NEW JERSEY
✟10,349.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Non sequitur, LittleNipper. The forces required to hold parts per million of a transient gaseous species in the stratosphere are nowhere near the forces required to create and hold overhead a hollow, spherical mass of water sufficient in volume to do what the Bible proposes (leaving aside that lack of geological evidence for a global flood for the moment).



no experimentation on an ice canopy, or no experimentation on atmospheric retention forces? If the latter, you are wrong.

Google Scholar search "atmospheric retention forces"
~33,800 hits in 0.14 seconds


If the former, well no experimentation is being done, because canopy theory is not viable (nor sane, for that matter). Even your AIG Overseers dislike it;

http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/dont_use.asp

see 3/4ths of the way down for "Canopy theory"
I do not believe that the canopy needed to hold up all the rain for Noah's FLOOD. Most of the water could have been subterranean. The canopy would have lessened ultraviolet ray affects and would have likely acted much as a terrarium. keeping both temperature and moisture constant.
 
Upvote 0

Molal

Nemo Me Impune Lacessit
Supporter
Feb 9, 2007
6,080
2,288
United States of America
✟38,405.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
UK-Conservative
I do not believe that the canopy needed to hold up all the rain for Noah's FLOOD. Most of the water could have been subterranean. The canopy would have lessened ultraviolet ray affects and would have likely acted much as a terrarium. keeping both temperature and moisture constant.
Can you calculate the volume of water needed to cover the highest mountain? Please state your assumptions (mountain height, etc.). Please deliver your answer in cubic kilometres (cubic miles would be ok).

Then we can go onto step 2.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

TeddyKGB

A dude playin' a dude disgused as another dude
Jul 18, 2005
6,495
453
46
Deep underground
✟8,993.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
I do not believe that the canopy needed to hold up all the rain for Noah's FLOOD. Most of the water could have been subterranean. The canopy would have lessened ultraviolet ray affects and would have likely acted much as a terrarium. keeping both temperature and moisture constant.
How would a "canopy" keep temperature constant unless it was impervious to heat transfer?

And a "canopy" made of water vapor that acts as a "terrarium" and absorbs UV light is going to contain a massive amount of water. There is a considerable amount of water vapor in the atmosphere already, yet the ozone layer is still necesssary for appreciable UV absorption.
 
Upvote 0

atomweaver

Senior Member
Nov 3, 2006
1,706
181
"Flat Raccoon", Connecticut
✟10,391.00
Faith
Agnostic
Politics
US-Democrat
I do not believe that the canopy needed to hold up all the rain for Noah's FLOOD. Most of the water could have been subterranean. The canopy would have lessened ultraviolet ray affects and would have likely acted much as a terrarium. keeping both temperature and moisture constant.

Funny you should mention UV light. UV that makes it through the atmosphere gets absorbed by the planet, and re-radiated as infrared heat, warming the atmosphere as it departs. We all have heard about this from the latest batch of popular global warming science, and its trivially easy to confirm for ones' self.
Heres the problem that that this effect presents to any ice canopy theory;

Water (and ice) is strongly absorptive of UV light. Drop under the water in a lake or ocean by a few inches, and light in the UV spectrum is basically non-existant. In fact, some of the earliest UV light filters made were two layers of quartz glass with water circulating through it. An ice canopy gives you the opposite effect of global warming, it gives massive cooling, as that whole UV and shorter wavelengths of EM spectrum (less than ~350 nm) and the resultant cycle of IR re-radiation is excluded from the atmosphere.
Basically, you've effectively removed enough heat from the sun/atmospheric system to freeze the whole planet inside the canopy solid, whether your ice canopy is five inches thick, or five leagues thick.
Please, show me in the Bible where it mentions such a state of things, pre-Flood..?
 
Upvote 0

Contracelsus

Senior Member
Dec 16, 2006
698
64
✟16,206.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Funny you should mention UV light. UV that makes it through the atmosphere gets absorbed by the planet, and re-radiated as infrared heat, warming the atmosphere as it departs. We all have heard about this from the latest batch of popular global warming science, and its trivially easy to confirm for ones' self.
Heres the problem that that this effect presents to any ice canopy theory;

Water (and ice) is strongly absorptive of UV light. Drop under the water in a lake or ocean by a few inches, and light in the UV spectrum is basically non-existant. In fact, some of the earliest UV light filters made were two layers of quartz glass with water circulating through it. An ice canopy gives you the opposite effect of global warming, it gives massive cooling, as that whole UV and shorter wavelengths of EM spectrum (less than ~350 nm) and the resultant cycle of IR re-radiation is excluded from the atmosphere.
Basically, you've effectively removed enough heat from the sun/atmospheric system to freeze the whole planet inside the canopy solid, whether your ice canopy is five inches thick, or five leagues thick.
Please, show me in the Bible where it mentions such a state of things, pre-Flood..?

Wow. That's pretty cool Atom. Thanks for posting that!

I like the idea of the first UV filters with water.

Science is so cool.
 
Upvote 0

atomweaver

Senior Member
Nov 3, 2006
1,706
181
"Flat Raccoon", Connecticut
✟10,391.00
Faith
Agnostic
Politics
US-Democrat
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Frumious Bandersnatch

Contributor
Mar 4, 2003
6,390
334
77
Visit site
✟15,931.00
Faith
Unitarian
:blush: Thanks Contracelsus. UV light is kind of my "thing". This is my industry

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uv#Curing_of_inks.2C_adhesives.2C_varnishes_and_coatings

We try to save the world a few million metric tons of carbon emissions, and a few billion dollars in energy costs every year. Its a great way to make a living... ;)
Of course in absorbing the UV energy and also the infrared energy radiated from the earth the ice would melt so such a canopy couldn't exist in the first place. An ice crystal canopy isn't quite as silly as Ikester's solid hydrogen canopy which some may remember but it is impossible.
 
Upvote 0