Fossils on mountains and the hydroplate theory

[lasthero]

That could be, that the sky was red at the time of the breakup of Pangaea. Just like they are making a big deal out of the blood moons that we have seen recently. Considered to be a sign of something, even though no one is sure of what it represents.

The moon turns that color because of the way sunlight refracts off the earth on rare occasions. It's not a new phenomenon, and there's nothing mystical about it.

 

[florida2]

That could be, that the sky was red at the time of the breakup of Pangaea.

Evidence?

Just like they are making a big deal out of the blood moons that we have seen recently. Considered to be a sign of something, even though no one is sure of what it represents.

The only people who are making any sort of deal out of 'blood moons' are a small number of religious people who think for some reason they are a sign of the end times or whatever. Everyone who actually knows what 'blood moons' are knows they mean nothing.

All it is is a lunar eclipse - that's where the Earth comes between the moon and the sun. Light passing through Earth's atmosphere is refracted with the red light refracted the most. Therefore, only the red light is able to reach the moon, hence why it looks red. The 'blood moon' name is just a silly, scary name to make them sound like something spooky and mysterious.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_eclipse

There is nothing mysterious or supernatural about them. They are very easy to predict - if you click on the link about recent and forthcoming lunar eclipses in that article you can see they have been plotted thousands of years into the past and at least a thousand years into the future.

 

[joshua 1 9]

The sky was blue then according geochemical/paleoclimate evidence, not red.

Of course the big question is if there was more humidity and more water in the atmosphere back at the time of the dinosaurs compared to after their extinction.

 

[Herman Hedning]

Deleted. Already answered.

 

[dad]

...There is evidence, but you make unfounded assumptions about natural processes changing dramatically (with no evidence) in order to dismiss it.

What you thought was evidence against the flood was actually just a lack of comprehension about what the evidence is. You didn't even know where to look or what to look for.

 

[RickG]

Of course the big question is if there was more humidity and more water in the atmosphere back at the time of the dinosaurs compared to after their extinction.

The climate was warmer during the Mesozoic, therefore, atmospheric water vapor content would be slightly higher. The important thing to understand about water vapor is that it is a feedback and not a climate forcing. The entire earth's moisture content cycles over a period of 10 to 14 days.

 

[The Cadet]

What you thought was evidence against the flood was actually just a lack of comprehension about what the evidence is. You didn't even know where to look or what to look for.

Let's say you were looking for evidence of literally any other historical flood. Say, maybe, you have some records that claim that a certain place in China was flooded. How would you go about evaluating that?

...Oh wait, you can't, because in throwing out uniformitarianism, you have jettisoned any ability to make any inferences about the past. Congrats!

 

[dad]

Let's say you were looking for evidence of literally any other historical flood. Say, maybe, you have some records that claim that a certain place in China was flooded. How would you go about evaluating that?

When looking for Noah's flood, I might start by looking for a major known extinction period, and also for some remains of stuff that is known to come from space or deep under the earth like the flood waters were known to have come from! Iridium seems to fit the bill...no?

 

[joshua 1 9]

The climate was warmer during the Mesozoic, therefore, atmospheric water vapor content would be slightly higher. The important thing to understand about water vapor is that it is a feedback and not a climate forcing. The entire earth's moisture content cycles over a period of 10 to 14 days.

I was under the impression that the period was "extremely humid".

"Huge amounts of this greenhouse gas made the climate during the Jurassic Period extremely humid and warm, said geoscientist Douwe van der Meer, lead author of the study and a researcher at Utrecht University in the Netherlands. Huge amounts of this greenhouse gas made the climate during the Jurassic Period extremely humid and warm, said geoscientist Douwe van der Meer, lead author of the study and a researcher at Utrecht University in the Netherlands. "

http://www.livescience.com/44330-jurassic-dinosaur-carbon-dioxide.html

 

[The Cadet]

I might start by looking for a major known extinction period,

No, I mean more along the lines of the 1931 chinese flooding. No extinction, just a large flooding.

 

[Loudmouth]

I guess they have it wrong if they consider dinosaurs to be reptiles.

You used crocodiles as your example, and they are definitely reptiles. Where do you get the idea that dinosaurs needed more humidity or heat? Also, are you trying to put forward the Canopy theory? If so, you might want to check the math first.

Air can hold, at most, 55 grams of water vapor per cubic meter. In contrast, liquid water is at a density of 1,000,000 grams per cubic meter. The ratio of the two numbers is 1:18,000. Therefore, a flood of 1 mile thickness (which would cover only 1/5 of Mount Everest), would require 18,000 miles of canopy. Besides the problem of gravity (which would bring the whole thing down), such a thick layer of water vapor would completely block any light from the Sun from reaching the earth.

Even a canopy of the equivalent of only 40 feet of liquid water would double the earth's atmospheric pressure, which would kill many animals, including humans. This pressure would also increase the temperature on the earth to a scorching 220°F. Most animals and plants do not survive long at this temperature.
http://godandscience.org/youngearth/canopy.html​

 

[Loudmouth]

The whole point of evolution is that the species adapt to their environment. If you do not know that much then your wasting your time. So just what evidence do you have that the dinosaurs lived in a dry climate. My evidence shows a very humid world at that time. Only a small remnant survive an extinction and are able to evolve. Only a tiny amount of the reptiles survived the transition from a humid to a dry climate. Just like in the days of Noah, only a few will be chosen by God to survive. Even if God uses natural selection to determine what species are going to survive.

Gen 7:4 For yets even days, and I will cause it to rain upon the earth forty days and forty nights; and every living substance that I have made will I destroy from off the face of the earth.

Noah's flood is a shadow and a type of the flood that took place at Pangaea many millions of years ago.

What was the climate like during the Mesozoic Era (250- 65 million years ago)?
When dinosaurs ruled the Earth, the climate was most likely hot and humid.
http://www.qm.qld.gov.au/microsites/dino/02-dinosaur-extinction-theories/climate-change.html

Here is the claim you made:

"Some believe that there was a lot more water in the atmosphere during the time of the dinosaurs sense they were reptiles and required a very wet atmosphere. Like an Alligator can only survive for a short amount of time outside of water."

Why would being a reptile require a wet atmosphere? Where is your evidence that dinosaurs required a wet atmosphere?