Fossils on mountains and the hydroplate theory

[RickG]

asteroids are in empty space, so no friction.

Not when they hit the earth's atmosphere, or impact the earth.

 

[PeterDona]

Look up Newtonian Kinetic Energy.

The energy is zero at the beginning of the hydroplate process. Do you think it remains zero when the continents start moving?

F=ma It takes a force (energy) to accelerate a mass, does it not?

My intention was to explain, why I had a very hard time believing in the conclusions of this asteroid investigation. But yes, we should get back to the moving continents.

Not when they hit the earth's atmosphere, or impact the earth.

Well that is for sure, then we will have a very nice shooting star.

 

[RickG]

My intention was to explain, why I had a very hard time believing in the conclusions of this asteroid investigation. But yes, we should get back to the moving continents.

Well that is for sure, then we will have a very nice shooting star.

Actually Brown's asteroids come for within the earth.

 

[AV1611VET]

Actually Brown's asteroids come for within the earth.

I don't understand this sentence.

 

[RickG]

I don't understand this sentence.

Walt Brown's hydroplate theory has comets, meteoroids, and asteroids originated from earth.

 

[AV1611VET]

Walt Brown's hydroplate theory has comets, meteoroids, and asteroids originated from earth.

QV:

Be patient, and read the next 65 pages carefully.

SOURCE

 

[RickG]

QV:
SOURCE

If you want to quote what you want me to read, please do so, then provide citation. Brown is claiming the composition of said asteroids, etc., are of the same composition of the earth's surface. In reality, nothing could be further from the truth.

 

[Loudmouth]

RickG,

I do not know much about hydroplate theory. It looked like a sensible counterargumentation, . . .

It isn't. When a theory requires rock to float on water, you have a problem. If you are interested in resources discussing the major problems with hydroplate theory, here are a few:

http://paleo.cc/ce/wbrown.htm

Or this one:

Suppose you placed the water under 10 km of crust, the pressure of the water would be 10 x 105 * 980 * 2.65 = 2.58 x 10^9 dynes= 2562 atmospheres of pressure.

The temperature gradient is 1 deg C for every 30 m so there is a 166 deg. C increase in temperature as we go deeper. 330 + 30 deg C (the surface temperature) =360 deg. C. (see below for justification of the temperature. For a layer of cave water 2 km thick all around the earth would contain 1 x 10^24 cubic centimeters of water. At 360 deg C, the high temperature water would contain 3.3 x 10^26 calories. (1 calorie per degree rise (330 degree rise)). The minute the pressure is released the water will turn to steam and you will cook the earth. Dividing the calories by the surface area of the earth shows that heat /cm2 = 3.3 x 10^26 Calories/5.09 x 10^18 square centimeters = 6.4 x 10^7 Cal/cm2.

This energy represents 1 year's worth of sunshine on a square centimeter at the equator. (The sun gives each square centimeter 2 calories per square centimeter per second) I don't think Noah could survive this. This enough energy to raise water to 64 million degrees C (assuming a specific heat of 1 cal/degree. Even if you use the 121 deg C value that Brown wants to use, this represents over 4 month's of solar radiation per square centimeter. No one could survive this event. It is a poor mechanism for a flood.
http://www.oldearth.org/walter_brown_hydroplate_theory.htm​

 

[AV1611VET]

When a theory requires rock to float on water, you have a problem.

No, you do.[VERSE=2 Kings 6:5-6,KJV][VERSENUM]5[/VERSENUM] But as one was felling a beam, the axe head fell into the water: and he cried, and said, Alas, master! for it was borrowed.

[VERSENUM]6[/VERSENUM] And the man of God said, Where fell it? And he shewed him the place. And he cut down a stick, and cast it in thither; and the iron did swim.[/VERSE][VERSE=Matthew 14:25,KJV]And in the fourth watch of the night Jesus went unto them, walking on the sea.[/VERSE]These aren't theories, they are truths.

 

[SkyWriting]

According to geological Magazine 1967 there were found crinoid fossils on top of Mount Everest. Where did they come from? Conventional plate tectonic geology seems to insufficient to explain how those fossils got there, but then how did they get there?

There is no way to know about past events. Either the water was that high, or the mountain that low, or some other 100 possibilities. Nature is often stranger than we can conceive.

 

[Loudmouth]

No, you do.[VERSE=2 Kings 6:5-6,KJV][VERSENUM]5[/VERSENUM] But as one was felling a beam, the axe head fell into the water: and he cried, and said, Alas, master! for it was borrowed.

[VERSENUM]6[/VERSENUM] And the man of God said, Where fell it? And he shewed him the place. And he cut down a stick, and cast it in thither; and the iron did swim.[/VERSE][VERSE=Matthew 14:25,KJV]And in the fourth watch of the night Jesus went unto them, walking on the sea.[/VERSE]These aren't theories, they are truths.

Repeating the preposterous claims does not solve the problem.

 

[Loudmouth]

There is no way to know about past events.

Police investigators strongly disagree, as does every scientist who has ever existed.

 

[AV1611VET]

Repeating the preposterous claims does not solve the problem.

What problem?

 

[SkyWriting]

When a theory requires rock to float on water, you have a problem.

Houston....we have a problem.

 

[Loudmouth]

What problem?

The magic problem. For the hydroplate theory to work it requires God to brush aside all fundamental physical laws which defeats the purpose of hydroplate theory to begin with. If your flood model requires magic, why try to make it look scientific? Just go full magic.

 

[Loudmouth]

Houston....we have a problem.

Is that the type of rock that makes up the continental plates?

 

[AV1611VET]

The magic problem. For the hydroplate theory to work it requires God to brush aside all fundamental physical laws which defeats the purpose of hydroplate theory to begin with. If your flood model requires magic, why try to make it look scientific? Just go full magic.

Well, for the record, I'm not familiar will all this hydroplate stuff.

I do wish creationists would stop trying to sound scientiffik and stuff.

 

[RickG]

It isn't. When a theory requires rock to float on water, you have a problem. If you are interested in resources discussing the major problems with hydroplate theory, here are a few:

http://paleo.cc/ce/wbrown.htm

Or this one:

Suppose you placed the water under 10 km of crust, the pressure of the water would be 10 x 105 * 980 * 2.65 = 2.58 x 10^9 dynes= 2562 atmospheres of pressure.

The temperature gradient is 1 deg C for every 30 m so there is a 166 deg. C increase in temperature as we go deeper. 330 + 30 deg C (the surface temperature) =360 deg. C. (see below for justification of the temperature. For a layer of cave water 2 km thick all around the earth would contain 1 x 10^24 cubic centimeters of water. At 360 deg C, the high temperature water would contain 3.3 x 10^26 calories. (1 calorie per degree rise (330 degree rise)). The minute the pressure is released the water will turn to steam and you will cook the earth. Dividing the calories by the surface area of the earth shows that heat /cm2 = 3.3 x 10^26 Calories/5.09 x 10^18 square centimeters = 6.4 x 10^7 Cal/cm2.

This energy represents 1 year's worth of sunshine on a square centimeter at the equator. (The sun gives each square centimeter 2 calories per square centimeter per second) I don't think Noah could survive this. This enough energy to raise water to 64 million degrees C (assuming a specific heat of 1 cal/degree. Even if you use the 121 deg C value that Brown wants to use, this represents over 4 month's of solar radiation per square centimeter. No one could survive this event. It is a poor mechanism for a flood.
http://www.oldearth.org/walter_brown_hydroplate_theory.htm​

What is so mind-boggling is that Walt Brown is a Mechanical Engineer. He should be well versed in a lot more than just the basic principles of theromdynamics.

I'm sure there are probably some figures on the estimated mass of the continents, but just for a quick exercise lets consider just Africa with 30,221,532 km2 (11,668,599 sq mi) with a thickness of some 40 km and a mass of 2.6g/cm3 (granite). Without doing the calculation it doesn't take a genius to understand that that is enormous. Now add the other continents in. But wait there is still more. Even with the mass of all the continents, there is the mass of the ocean floor (basalt), which is 3 times as much in area and a greater specific gravity of 2.9-3.0 to boot. Now think of the energy necessary to move those thousands of miles and build the mountains in the process in a few weeks time. The earth would be a molten mass.

 

[RickG]

Houston....we have a problem.

Pumice?

 

[Loudmouth]

What is so mind-boggling is that Walt Brown is a Mechanical Engineer. He should be well versed in a lot more than just the basic principles of theromdynamics.

I'm sure there are probably some figures on the estimated mass of the continents, but just for a quick exercise lets consider just Africa with 30,221,532 km2 (11,668,599 sq mi) with a thickness of some 40 km and a mass of 2.6g/cm3 (granite). Without doing the calculation it doesn't take a genius to understand that that is enormous. Now add the other continents in. But wait there is still more. Even with the mass of all the continents, there is the mass of the ocean floor (basalt), which is 3 times as much in area and a greater specific gravity of 2.9-3.0 to boot. Now think of the energy necessary to move those thousands of miles and build the mountains in the process in a few weeks time. The earth would be a molten mass.

Not to mention that we have tons of evidence for a much more pedestrian pace for these plates. This is evidence that Walt Brown never explained. The Emporer Seamounts and Hawaiian archipelago were created by the Pacific plate moving over a mostly stationary hotspot.

Therefore, the radiometric dates for the lava rocks on these islands can be used to measure the speed of the plate. As expected, it took 60 million years to move the plate 5,000 km, not a few days.

I once found the line of best fit for those points, and it was very close to the current measured movement of the plate. However, I can't find that resource for the GPS measurements anymore. Oh well. Still fun to see the math work out like you think it should.