• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

  • CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.

Scientific Noah's flood.

duordi

Senior Member
Feb 4, 2005
1,107
11
✟1,320.00
Faith
Non-Denom
I have noticed a lot of debate about Noah's flood and there are some misconceptions about how it could work scientifically.
This is not intended as a proof but I am hoping to raise the technical side a few notches.

Trying to cover a continent with water is like trying to make ice cubes sink in a glass partially full of water. The continents like the ice cube is floating. Adding water to the glass will just make the ice float higher.

That does not mean the continents did not sink. It just means you have to consider buoyancy.

The creation story does not indicate the world was flooded by rain unless you are looking at the comic book version.
Genesis 7
11 In the year 600 of Noah’s life, in the seventeenth day of the second month, that same day all the fountains of the great deep were broken up and burst forth, and the windows and floodgates of the heavens were opened.
There are two reasons given for the continents submerging. The first and therefore the most important is that the fountains of the deep were broken up. The fountains of the deep are volcano's which do discharge water along with many other materials. As it turns out the water or gas portion of the ejection is very important.

The question we need to need to ask is what is the buoyancy of a vertical column through a continent and what is the buoyancy of a vertical column through the ocean? Both columns include a portion of the mantel layer in which they float.

The two columns contain a weight which is almost equal when the entire columns are considered even though the tip of the continent which is above seal level seems large to us. If for some reason the column through a continent became heaver then a column through the ocean the continents would sink until submerged. Water need not be added to make this occur.

According to verse 11 the ocean bottom is now broken allowing an average thickness of 400 foot of lava to be ejected into seawater. (The thickness is determined by scientific information given later). This kind of event causes Pumice which is lava which has cooled quickly after being ejected from a higher pressure area to a lower pressure area. Gases expand in the molten rock which cause bubbles in the rock formed. Before the bubbles can escape the rock hardens trapping the gas bubbles. The rocks have a specific gravity of about 0.6 which means they float having a lower specific gravity then water. One cubic foot of lava will cause five cubic foot of Pumice because Pumice is mostly hollow.

When the Pumice forms it will float to the oceans surface unless there are strong vertical upwards and downward currents or it is attached to the ocean floor.

When the Pumice reaches the surface wave motion will quickly grind the Pumice against itself into a fine silt which will fall to the ocean floor. Pumice is very brittle and structurally week compared to other rocks with thin walls of rock surrounding bubble structures.

Huge pumice 'island' floating in Pacific - Technology & science - Science - LiveScience | NBC News

Note that I did not say the ocean floor has not been elevated.

Our 400’ of lava has caused a 2,000’ elevation in sea level because of the enlarged volume of Pumice rock but all of the water column will not remain over the ocean. An elevated ocean will flood many of the continental areas.

Now we will consider the buoyancy of the continent and the ocean columns.

While this event is occurring the ocean is a mixture of Pumice and water which has a decreased density. The ocean column has also lost the weight of hundreds of foot of water to the land areas.

The continent has taken on the additional weight of a water column above most of the continental areas, rain will only increase the weight of the continents as any depression in the landscape will collect water and saturate ground areas. I do not think this is a major contributor to the buoyancy shift.

In short the continents have become heaver and the oceans have become lighter. When the continents begin to sink magma is forced out of the ocean floor volcano's causing more Pumice.

Eventually the decrease in the mantle portion of the continent column will cause a new balance point because the mantle is composed of very dense material.

Once the ocean floor is sealed Pumice will float to the surface, grind itself into a powder in the waves and settle to the bottom of the ocean. Which is what we find today however some areas are thick and others are not indicating the condition was uneven over the ocean floors.

ocean basin (Earth feature) : Deep-sea sediments -- Britannica Online Encyclopedia

The ocean water has now returned to its original density which means the continents have a lighter buoyancy column then the ocean does. The continents must rise from the ocean.

This process may take some time however. The continents will have many inland lakes captured during the rise of the continents and the soils are saturated. Plate tectonics will have formed much higher mountains then would have been formed on land due to the added buoyancy provide by submersion in the ocean water. There must be time for water runoff and evaporate from the continents. Glaciers will also affect the new continent elevation equilibrium point.

Noah was on the ark for a year and a half. There is no record how long it took to cause most of the land masses to elevate above water level. We have not elevated to the original sea level yet so you could say the flood has not ended.

As always your comments and correction are appreciated.

Duordi
 

Split Rock

Conflation of Blathers
Nov 3, 2003
17,607
730
North Dakota
✟22,466.00
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Single
I have noticed a lot of debate about Noah's flood and there are some misconceptions about how it could work scientifically.
This is not intended as a proof but I am hoping to raise the technical side a few notches.

Trying to cover a continent with water is like trying to make ice cubes sink in a glass partially full of water. The continents like the ice cube is floating. Adding water to the glass will just make the ice float higher.

That does not mean the continents did not sink. It just means you have to consider buoyancy.

The creation story does not indicate the world was flooded by rain unless you are looking at the comic book version.
There are two reasons given for the continents submerging. The first and therefore the most important is that the fountains of the deep were broken up. The fountains of the deep are volcano's which do discharge water along with many other materials. As it turns out the water or gas portion of the ejection is very important.

The question we need to need to ask is what is the buoyancy of a vertical column through a continent and what is the buoyancy of a vertical column through the ocean? Both columns include a portion of the mantel layer in which they float.

The two columns contain a weight which is almost equal when the entire columns are considered even though the tip of the continent which is above seal level seems large to us. If for some reason the column through a continent became heaver then a column through the ocean the continents would sink until submerged. Water need not be added to make this occur.

According to verse 11 the ocean bottom is now broken allowing an average thickness of 400 foot of lava to be ejected into seawater. (The thickness is determined by scientific information given later). This kind of event causes Pumice which is lava which has cooled quickly after being ejected from a higher pressure area to a lower pressure area. Gases expand in the molten rock which cause bubbles in the rock formed. Before the bubbles can escape the rock hardens trapping the gas bubbles. The rocks have a specific gravity of about 0.6 which means they float having a lower specific gravity then water. One cubic foot of lava will cause five cubic foot of Pumice because Pumice is mostly hollow.

When the Pumice forms it will float to the oceans surface unless there are strong vertical upwards and downward currents or it is attached to the ocean floor.

When the Pumice reaches the surface wave motion will quickly grind the Pumice against itself into a fine silt which will fall to the ocean floor. Pumice is very brittle and structurally week compared to other rocks with thin walls of rock surrounding bubble structures.

Huge pumice 'island' floating in Pacific - Technology & science - Science - LiveScience | NBC News

Note that I did not say the ocean floor has not been elevated.

Our 400’ of lava has caused a 2,000’ elevation in sea level because of the enlarged volume of Pumice rock but all of the water column will not remain over the ocean. An elevated ocean will flood many of the continental areas.

Now we will consider the buoyancy of the continent and the ocean columns.

While this event is occurring the ocean is a mixture of Pumice and water which has a decreased density. The ocean column has also lost the weight of hundreds of foot of water to the land areas.

The continent has taken on the additional weight of a water column above most of the continental areas, rain will only increase the weight of the continents as any depression in the landscape will collect water and saturate ground areas. I do not think this is a major contributor to the buoyancy shift.

In short the continents have become heaver and the oceans have become lighter. When the continents begin to sink magma is forced out of the ocean floor volcano's causing more Pumice.

Eventually the decrease in the mantle portion of the continent column will cause a new balance point because the mantle is composed of very dense material.

Once the ocean floor is sealed Pumice will float to the surface, grind itself into a powder in the waves and settle to the bottom of the ocean. Which is what we find today however some areas are thick and others are not indicating the condition was uneven over the ocean floors.

ocean basin (Earth feature) : Deep-sea sediments -- Britannica Online Encyclopedia

The ocean water has now returned to its original density which means the continents have a lighter buoyancy column then the ocean does. The continents must rise from the ocean.

This process may take some time however. The continents will have many inland lakes captured during the rise of the continents and the soils are saturated. Plate tectonics will have formed much higher mountains then would have been formed on land due to the added buoyancy provide by submersion in the ocean water. There must be time for water runoff and evaporate from the continents. Glaciers will also affect the new continent elevation equilibrium point.

Noah was on the ark for a year and a half. There is no record how long it took to cause most of the land masses to elevate above water level. We have not elevated to the original sea level yet so you could say the flood has not ended.

As always your comments and correction are appreciated.

Duordi

You still haven't read this yet: History of the Collapse of Flood Geology and a Young Earth ... have you?
 
Upvote 0

RickG

Senior Veteran
Site Supporter
Oct 1, 2011
10,092
1,430
Georgia
✟128,873.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Married
As always your comments and correction are appreciated.

Duordi

Are you willing to look at and try to understand those corrections? I would be more than willing to help you with some of the misunderstandings I see in your OP concerning geology and paleoclimatology. :)
 
Upvote 0

duordi

Senior Member
Feb 4, 2005
1,107
11
✟1,320.00
Faith
Non-Denom

Actually I had not.

An interesting read.

I agree with this part.

"One might expect that such individuals would instead make appeals solely to the Word of God as the complete and final authority in all such matters and that they would denounce extrabiblical evidence as superfluous and misleading. And yet the proponents of flood geology have moved in the opposite direction, not only showing a substantial interest in extrabiblical evidence but actually elevating it to the status of apologetic proof.

I did get the feeling that it was written by someone who has the definite opinoin that the flood did not happen.

Unfortunitly the entire article seemed to be based on a flood caused primarily by rain which is exactally the acient thinking I am hoping to clear up. Purhaps I can add a positive chapter to the history.

I have to admit that as Christains we sometimes spend less time looking at Bible text to see what the text says than the Scientific community does checking their numbers.

The purpose of this thread is to use scientific evidence to determine what would cause what the Bibie said happend.

I reasonded through the process first and then serached to find evidence. You can not emagine my excitment when I found the predicted residue was found on the ocean floor and that a floating chunck of Pumice as big as Rhode island really existed.

A theory is the most fun when it predicts things that can be verified.

Duordi
 
Upvote 0

Tomk80

Titleless
Apr 27, 2004
11,570
429
45
Maastricht
Visit site
✟36,582.00
Faith
Agnostic
If found large anounts of pumice and a thick layer of residue on the ocean floor.
If I did not start with the theory I would have had nothing to look for becasue the evidence must be predicted by the theory.

If you are saying there is no evidence for the flood in other data then consider that there a sea shells on the top of mt everest.

Why are Seashells on Mount Everest

Duordi
And the link you gave explains why. Hint: not the flood.
 
Upvote 0

toLiJC

Senior Member
Jun 18, 2012
3,041
227
✟35,877.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
the flood from the time of Noah was a spiritual cleaning, while the Noah's ark was just the covenant of God with Noah

1 Peter 3:18-22 "Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit: By which also he went and preached unto the spirits(ie unto the unrighteous spiritual servants/workers) in prison(ie in the "darkness"); Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark(ie the Covenant of God with Noah) was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water(ie by spiritual cleaning). The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ: Who is gone into heaven, and is on the right hand of God; angels and authorities and powers being made subject unto him."

Blessings
 
Upvote 0

Split Rock

Conflation of Blathers
Nov 3, 2003
17,607
730
North Dakota
✟22,466.00
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Single
Actually I had not.

An interesting read.

I agree with this part.

"One might expect that such individuals would instead make appeals solely to the Word of God as the complete and final authority in all such matters and that they would denounce extrabiblical evidence as superfluous and misleading. And yet the proponents of flood geology have moved in the opposite direction, not only showing a substantial interest in extrabiblical evidence but actually elevating it to the status of apologetic proof.

I did get the feeling that it was written by someone who has the definite opinoin that the flood did not happen.

Unfortunitly the entire article seemed to be based on a flood caused primarily by rain which is exactally the acient thinking I am hoping to clear up. Purhaps I can add a positive chapter to the history.

I have to admit that as Christains we sometimes spend less time looking at Bible text to see what the text says than the Scientific community does checking their numbers.

The purpose of this thread is to use scientific evidence to determine what would cause what the Bibie said happend.

I reasonded through the process first and then serached to find evidence. You can not emagine my excitment when I found the predicted residue was found on the ocean floor and that a floating chunck of Pumice as big as Rhode island really existed.

A theory is the most fun when it predicts things that can be verified.

Duordi
Thank you for reading the link. It is an interesting read, isn't it? A few points I wish to emphasize:
It was written buy an Evangelical Christian who was not willing to reject the reality we see today just because it conflicts with a specific interpretation of scripture. It also serves to shine some light on the true history of the topic... which one never sees from "Creation Ministry" websites. As far as whether or not the flood waters were restricted to rain, that was actually not really addressed. It was all about what the geological record actually tells us about the earth's past. The conclusions of Christian geologists of the 19th century remain the same as today:

None of the sedimentary layers we see in the geolgical column can be attributed to a global flood.

Any model you come up with, needs to address this fact.
 
Upvote 0

duordi

Senior Member
Feb 4, 2005
1,107
11
✟1,320.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Thank you for reading the link. It is an interesting read, isn't it? A few points I wish to emphasize:
It was written buy an Evangelical Christian who was not willing to reject the reality we see today just because it conflicts with a specific interpretation of scripture. It also serves to shine some light on the true history of the topic... which one never sees from "Creation Ministry" websites. As far as whether or not the flood waters were restricted to rain, that was actually not really addressed. It was all about what the geological record actually tells us about the earth's past. The conclusions of Christian geologists of the 19th century remain the same as today:

None of the sedimentary layers we see in the geolgical column can be attributed to a global flood.

Any model you come up with, needs to address this fact.
I am well aware of the hurtles I will have to deal with.
If it was easy it would not be as much fun.

I will be sure to mension your name in the title of the post I deal with the geological record - that is of course if I am able to deal with the geological record.

Duordi
 
Upvote 0

juvenissun

... and God saw that it was good.
Apr 5, 2007
25,452
805
73
Chicago
✟138,626.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
The conclusions of Christian geologists of the 19th century remain the same as today:

None of the sedimentary layers we see in the geolgical column can be attributed to a global flood.

Any model you come up with, needs to address this fact.

That is an absolute nonsense. Instead:

Any sedimentary layer (in water) we see today CAN be attributed to the global flood.
 
Upvote 0

Split Rock

Conflation of Blathers
Nov 3, 2003
17,607
730
North Dakota
✟22,466.00
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Single
That is an absolute nonsense. Instead:

Any sedimentary layer (in water) we see today CAN be attributed to the global flood.

No Juvie. Read the article. There are no sedimentary layers that can be attributed to a global flood. Not to a flood... to a global flood. In other words, there are no global sedimentary layers that could have come from the same flood. This was established early in the 19th century. You are just saying, "there are sedimentary layers, therefore we can just simple-mindedly attribute them to a global flood if we like." Even the the early 1800s, geologists knew better than that. You and your "flood geologist" ilk are way behind the times.
 
Upvote 0

lillivanilli

May the schwartz be with you.
Dec 5, 2011
352
38
✟23,164.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
I stumbled across the book not too long ago: The Bible, Genesis & Geology I originally got it because at the time it was free, and I had never heard much about the "Gap Theory" before so was kind of curious. But coincidentally enough I am just to a point in the book where the author is discussing scientific indicators of a real global flood. I haven't taken the time yet to explore his source citations but it might be of interest to the OP (or anyone else!).
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,856,275
52,670
Guam
✟5,160,598.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
The creation story does not indicate the world was flooded by rain unless you are looking at the comic book version.
Would you please tell me what the creation story has to do with the Flood?
 
Upvote 0