• 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.

Does a GLOBAL FLOOD truly seem like the BEST explanation for seashells on mountains?

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Status
Not open for further replies.
Sort by date Sort by votes

Herman Hedning

Hiking is fun
Mar 2, 2004
503,948
1,605
N 57° 44', E 12° 00'
Visit site
✟798,267.00
Faith
Humanist

Yes, the water canopy is what I replied to. A few degrees? Are you kidding?

Pro primo: To keep enough water for the Noachic flood suspended in the atmosphere would increase the atmospheric pressure at sea level to, say, 600 atm. No life as we know it could survive that.

Pro secundo: Having that amount of water fall to the ground in a short while (40 days, right?) would through well known processes increase the temperature at ground level to more than 800°C (1500°F). No life could survive that.

Thanks for the reply.
 
Upvote 0

TLK Valentine

I've already read the books you want burned.
Apr 15, 2012
64,493
30,323
Behind the 8-ball, but ahead of the curve.
✟541,582.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Single
AV1611VET said:
Not to sound too ignorant here, but wasn't that the point of the Flood?
Click to expand...

To roast the people and animals on the Ark to a crisp? You tell me.
 
Upvote 0
L

Lucy Stulz

Well-Known Member
Apr 3, 2013
1,394
57
✟1,937.00
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
AV1611VET said:
What about them?

I assume they would accept that list; wouldn't you?

How does that old saying go? It takes one to know one?
Click to expand...

I wouldn't necessarily say they wouldaccept the list. Real scientists can be a harsh group toward each other.

A geologist may not really care what a biologist thinks about rocks.
 
Upvote 0

createdtoworship

In the grip of grace
Mar 13, 2004
18,941
1,758
West Coast USA
✟48,173.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married

okay I was like, this guy has a point here.....then I read your second statement. Are you kidding?

water raining down on the earth will increase ground level temps to over 1500°F?

So, it magically recieves heat from the friction of the fall?

Water in a water canopy would be relatively cold, I would think.

If it fell it certainly would not be 1500 degrees,


mmmmaaaaayyyyybbbeee

60-70 tops.

but I am open to any documentation you may have,

please proceed...
 
Upvote 0

createdtoworship

In the grip of grace
Mar 13, 2004
18,941
1,758
West Coast USA
✟48,173.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married

you will have to excuse my poor grammer, and spelling in this post. It's early, and I have not had coffee.


you are correct that warmer water has less DO (dissolved oxygen), however the presence of oxygen depleting organisms are the main culprit in killing off oceanic life, not a few degrees temp rise.

That is quite a stretch (that 2-3 degrees would deplete the oceans of oxygen).

source:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fish_kill

so algae/bacteria is the problem you are probably referring to, not a few degrees of temperature rise.

the average temperature of the ocean is 39 degrees
http://hypertextbook.com/facts/2007/LilyLi.shtml

for algae to bloom you need a minimum of 60 degrees - 80 degrees span

so thats a 20 degree window that we could add warmer water to the oceans and not have algae bloom.

thirdly, distilled water coming from the atmosphere will dilute global oceanic TDS and salinity content, so if the temperatures will rise because of raining water, but he solubility of the water to dissolve oxygen will increase as the salinity has decreased and be compensated. (salt makes water less able to dissolve oxygen).

conclusion:

for fill kill to happen a few things must occur:

water must raise temperature a minimum of 21 degrees globally.

algae/bacteria must grow and engulf existing oxygen content, and grow even more to engulf oxygen content of the increased oxygen absorbed by pure rain water, obviously being penetrated with oxygen for miles of free fall through oxygen on the way down.

then the fish must migrate toward the warm areas where the water temps have increased, algae has had weeks to grow and produce, and suffocate.

Your theory is a valid theory,

it's just lacking the factual evidence of support.

You need to prove that billions of gallons of cold space water will increase ocean water from 39 degrees to 60 or more degrees,

I am being generus here,

the other thing algae and plant life needs is phosphates, again this would be diluted with oxygen enhanced rain water of a distilled sort.

So it is really a super enriched environment for growth and renewal, not death.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,856,323
52,688
Guam
✟5,167,072.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,856,323
52,688
Guam
✟5,167,072.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Upvote 0

Mr Strawberry

Newbie
Jan 20, 2012
4,180
81
Great Britain
✟27,542.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship

I assume it is something to do with the water vapour condensing into water droplets to become rain and releasing heat when doing so. It's one the main ways heat is transferred back into the atmosphere from solar heating of oceans. Anyway, if enough water vapour condensed to produce enough rain for a biblical flood over 40 days, the heat released would be quite significant. No idea if it would be 800 degrees worth, but if you've got an atmospheric pressure high enough to allow that amount of water vapour in the atmosphere, I'd say there was a good chance everything would be cooked.
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,856,323
52,688
Guam
✟5,167,072.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
AkiraYamato said:
Well, we japanese people survived it aparantly...and we were not on Noahs cruise.
Click to expand...
That's an interesting feat, since the Japanese are the descendants of Ham, Noah's son.
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,856,323
52,688
Guam
✟5,167,072.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Lucy Stulz said:
I wouldn't necessarily say they wouldaccept the list. Real scientists can be a harsh group toward each other.

A geologist may not really care what a biologist thinks about rocks.
Click to expand...
Let's simplify this discussion, Lucy.

Here's grady's list again:
Do you see anyone on that list that you, personally, wouldn't call a scientist?
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,856,323
52,688
Guam
✟5,167,072.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
AkiraYamato said:
ha ha ha sorry but no.
Click to expand...
Let me get this straight.

You didn't know anyone still believes Noah's flood was global.

You aren't familiar with Shadrach, Meschach, and Abednego in the burning, fiery furnace.

Yet when I say the Japanese came from Ham, you suddenly become knowledgeable on the subject?

I'm getting the feeling you're just here to ... well ... do what the others here do -- vent & ridicule us.

Please correct me if I'm wrong.

I'd hate to think the Shinto hate us as well.
 
Upvote 0

createdtoworship

In the grip of grace
Mar 13, 2004
18,941
1,758
West Coast USA
✟48,173.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married

okay I have no idea what you are saying,

not that you are wrong.

I don't see how water falling from the atmosphere would be 1500 degree, let alone 800 degrees.

I could be missing something, but the only thing I could find that closely resembles your view is the green house affect because of the water canopy. While all life would thrive under a subtropical climate, some oceanic life would be sacrificed as waters would become warmer. I have a theory that compensates for this. It is still in the works and is not yet complete but I will give you what I have:

it's basically a much thicker water canopy than previously believed by creationists.

This canopy would actually be able to repel radiation from the sun off the top of the canopy, reducing green house affect on the globe.

I first came to this conclusion reading this article:

feel free to check it out
https://www.icr.org/i/pdf/research/Canopy.pdf
 
Upvote 0
L

Lucy Stulz

Well-Known Member
Apr 3, 2013
1,394
57
✟1,937.00
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
gradyll said:
here is paper by dr. Walt brown mentioning a few of these "vast blanket sedimentary rocks," not "one" deposit, but so many of them are thousands of miles long, that views have originated about a global sized sea (paleozic sea) they call it.
Click to expand...

first off the N American continent had a number of "epieric" seas transgress across it and cut it up etc.

Parts of the Ordovician had most of the area between the Appalachians and what is now the Rockies under water. Later in the Carboniferous an inland sea retreated and then came back later on.

Interesting thing about stuff like this is a feature called a "transgressive sequence", where the rocks show you the slow march of the water up onto the continent and a "regressive sequence" showing the trip back out. When you find a couple of these in one area you realize that this has happened a number of times.

To look at a few large extent formations and assume it is a single massive flood means you will likely have to explain another one at a DIFFERENT time horizon in the rock too. So how many Noachian floods do we have to account for?

Further some of these formations contain huge thick layers of SHALE, some "black shale" which means they formed in low energy environments over a long period of time.

Take some clay sometime and slurry it up in taaaaalll glass of water and look at how long it takes to settle out. The drive through a roadcut with 100' thick shale and think about it for a bit.
 
Upvote 0
L

Lucy Stulz

Well-Known Member
Apr 3, 2013
1,394
57
✟1,937.00
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
AV1611VET said:
Let's simplify this discussion, Lucy.

Here's grady's list again:

Do you see anyone on that list that you, personally, wouldn't call a scientist?
Click to expand...

Note I didn't say they weren't scientists.

I answered your question ast whether that would change a scientist's attitude toward a claim.

Scientists disagree with each other all the time.

And when a biologist suggests that a rock layer may be formed by a very non standard geologic process, the geologist will likely correct them.

When a physicist tells a biologist all about how evolution is a crock, the biologist may very well correct them.

Just being a "scientist" doesn't make one infallible on all topics.

Even scientists within the same discipline argue with each other! Only they sometimes aren't as nice to each other as people are on this thread.
 
Upvote 0

createdtoworship

In the grip of grace
Mar 13, 2004
18,941
1,758
West Coast USA
✟48,173.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married

okay, I found your arguments online, give me some time to read through them. It appears that the high heat of a water canopy is one reason leading to the acceptance of a hydroplate theory. However, I believe both. A thick water canopy and a minor hydroplate burst. Rather than a major hydroplate burst which would kill oceanic life. But hold on, let me gather info. I will get back in a moment-
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Are the Jews Israel, or is the church Israel? Or does it depend on the context of the passage?
Replies
110
Views
3K
Eschatology - Endtimes & Prophecy Forum
Carl Emerson
The Frequent Appearance of Blood Moons: An Astronomical Phenomenon, or a Warning of the Last Days?
Replies
0
Views
664
Daily Devotionals
Cindy1995
B
A perspective on Baptism and the plan of salvation that I have not heard before
Replies
62
Views
3K
Denomination Specific Theology
boughtwithaprice
B
Isaiah 54:11-55:5 and John 9:1-10:42 (HafTarah for Parasha "Re'eh)
Replies
0
Views
468
Messianic Judaism
RabbiJames
The Feast of Tabernacles or "Sukkot" It's HERE
Replies
0
Views
229
Messianic Judaism
RabbiJames
Menu
Log in
Register