Source of water for the flood

[TexasSky]

Yes I did, and unlike you I understood it as well



Some of them, there are many, and some of them are very boring



Yes, this water is in the form of hydrated minerals, as I have said before, it is looked into the structure of the rock and it isn't going anywhere.

Can you grasp that, this isn't free water we are talking about.

WE have known that there are vast amounts of minerally fixed water in the earth's mantle for a lot longer than 6 years.

Huge amounts of water are also transported into the mantle in subduction zones.



No they didn't. This is where you show that you didn't really understand the paper at all.

Go and look at a simple definition of the earth's interior and learn the difference between core and mantle. TRhey are technical terms with definitions.



It is an interesting subject, why don't you post links to the others? Or better still, seeing as you often have to be a subscriber to get the full text, why don't you summarise the main points for us.



Excellent, give us the mian points.

I am especially interested in the parts where the researcher ties in his reaserch to a Noachian flood



So you always tells us, although what that has got to do with geology is beyond me.




Tell me about what?



OK



Quite possibly



You know it, but appear not to be able to understand it. There is a difference.

Still if you can show me where these guys tie in their work to a Noachian flood 4000 years ago I will take it all back

Ah, yes, pretending to be intelligent and mocking people always works well when trying to win a debate.

(NOT)

Let's back up.
You, no one else, you claimed there was no water in the earth's core, crust, whatever.
You, no one else, were corrected on that "error".
You came back and claimed everyone had to believe you because you deem yourself to be an expert.
I told you, not true, there IS water down there.
You came back and said, "only 1% of what is on top of the earth."
I corrected you again, and I produced a paper that said, "There is a small ocean" down there.

Now you've resorted to, "Well, they didn't say it was connected to the flood!" And, "Well, yeah, I knew that for a long time."

If you knew it for a long time, why did you deny it earlier?

And YOU said that even if it was there, it would take a tremendous amount of pressure to force it up.

Ever been to Yellowstone National Park? Happens faithfully there.

Or did you forget that steam is super heated water? They do still teach geophysicists that don't they?

So, stop being insultingly childish. If you are what you claim you are, it is beneath you.

If you want to say, "I misspoke when I said there is no water in the core or the crust," then say it, and I'll take the rest of what you claim more seriously.

Until that time. I don't take you seriously.

 

[Loudmouth]

Per the biblical account, the waters of the deep opened up, then it rained for 40 days and 40 nights. So water from the crust, thrust upwards at super heat, thrown into the atmosphere, then pouring down again.

That's what the bible says, but what does the evidence say?

 

[thaumaturgy]

Per the biblical account, the waters of the deep opened up, then it rained for 40 days and 40 nights. So water from the crust, thrust upwards at super heat, thrown into the atmosphere, then pouring down again.

Couple problems here:

FIRST, THIS POST, you need to account for the water on a broad "water budget" basis.

SECOND: Have you ever been to Old Faithful in Yellowstone? That's superheated water, flashing at near or above the boiling point with a sudden loss of pressure. It is water at 244 °F. That's pretty hot. And that water is just in the crust and circulating in contact with a cooling igneous pluton if I recall.

Imagine if you were sourcing water from the Upper Mantle. The temperature there is about 1,600° F that's significantly hotter. The autoignition temperature of wood appears to be around 500°F. So it would certainly help if the Ark were made of asbestos. (I am assuming Gopher wood is not too different in autoignition temp).

You're moving superheated, high pressure steam out of the planet in an extremely short time frame. The amount of water has to be within reasonable ranges and the speed has to be taken into account if the Bible account is a literal account.

 

[thaumaturgy]

And YOU said that even if it was there, it would take a tremendous amount of pressure to force it up.

Ever been to Yellowstone National Park? Happens faithfully there.

That water, if I recall, comes from the upper part of the crust. It is, again if I'm recalling my geology of Yellowstone, mostly recirculated groundwater that moves down near the cooling igneous pluton that was the core of the supervolcanoe that left the caldera that is part of Yellowstone today.

Some of the water may be sourced from the magma itself.

But, I don't believe we are seeing water that is sourced from the upper mantle in Old Faithful.

 

[Loudmouth]

That water, if I recall, comes from the upper part of the crust. It is, again if I'm recalling my geology of Yellowstone, mostly recirculated groundwater that moves down near the cooling igneous pluton that was the core of the supervolcanoe that left the caldera that is part of Yellowstone today.

That is my understanding as well. The eruptions are due to cool water capping the superheated water below. The pressure from the cool water cap keeps the water from boiling. Once this cap is breach the pressure is released and the superheated water erupts. As an analogy, it's like shaking a soda bottle and popping the cap.

But, I don't believe we are seeing water that is sourced from the upper mantle in Old Faithful.

It's water from the local acquifer.

 

[Valkhorn]

Ah, yes, pretending to be intelligent and mocking people always works well when trying to win a debate.

(NOT)

Let's back up.
You, no one else, you claimed there was no water in the earth's core, crust, whatever.
You, no one else, were corrected on that "error".
You came back and claimed everyone had to believe you because you deem yourself to be an expert.
I told you, not true, there IS water down there.
You came back and said, "only 1% of what is on top of the earth."
I corrected you again, and I produced a paper that said, "There is a small ocean" down there.

Now you've resorted to, "Well, they didn't say it was connected to the flood!" And, "Well, yeah, I knew that for a long time."

If you knew it for a long time, why did you deny it earlier?

And YOU said that even if it was there, it would take a tremendous amount of pressure to force it up.

Ever been to Yellowstone National Park? Happens faithfully there.

Or did you forget that steam is super heated water? They do still teach geophysicists that don't they?

So, stop being insultingly childish. If you are what you claim you are, it is beneath you.

If you want to say, "I misspoke when I said there is no water in the core or the crust," then say it, and I'll take the rest of what you claim more seriously.

Until that time. I don't take you seriously.

Baggins is an actual geologist. You are not.

Case closed.

 

[Valkhorn]

Per the biblical account, the waters of the deep opened up, then it rained for 40 days and 40 nights. So water from the crust, thrust upwards at super heat, thrown into the atmosphere, then pouring down again.

But there is no geological evidence for this ever occurring to globally flood the Earth. Plus the water would have been super-heated and would have burned the wooden boat.

Once again you fail at Geology.

 

[juvenissun]

No explanation for the Hawaiian Islands?

What about it?

 

[juvenissun]

That's what the bible says, but what does the evidence say?

What evidence?

 

[Loudmouth]

What evidence?

Post #285

 

[Valkhorn]

What evidence?

You never studied.

 

[juvenissun]

Post #285

No. But that only goes back to 70 Ma. What do you know about the tectonics, say at 100 Ma? Where is Hawaii at that time?

May be it just popped up from China?

 

[Baggins]

Per the biblical account, the waters of the deep opened up, then it rained for 40 days and 40 nights. So water from the crust, thrust upwards at super heat, thrown into the atmosphere, then pouring down again.

Making the atmosphere superheated steam and poaching Noah to a turn.

One dead Patriarch

 

[TexasSky]

Baggins is an actual geologist. You are not.

Case closed.

The people who did the study and said, "There is an small ocean there," were ALSO geologists.

 

[TexasSky]

Making the atmosphere superheated steam and poaching Noah to a turn.

One dead Patriarch

Funny,

I've been around super heated, quickly cooled water quite often, and no poached critters.

 

[Baggins]

Ah, yes, pretending to be intelligent and mocking people always works well when trying to win a debate.

We're having a debate? I thought I was trying to help out someone who once worked in a DNA lab who had got hopelessly muddled in geology

You, no one else, you claimed there was no water in the earth's core, crust, whatever.

Care to point that out?

I pointed out there was no free water, water that is part of complex minerals is something completely different.

You may as well say " I can get loads of silicon to the surface of the earth because there is plenty of it down there"

Yes there is, but it is tied up in minerals, the same way as the water is.

You, no one else, were corrected on that "error".

What was claimed was that there was a large body od water in the earths crust, this is patently false. There is water in teh crust but it isn't in a body it is held in hydrated minerals.

I'm suprised someone with enough science to get a job in a DNA LAB can't grasp such a simple point.

You came back and claimed everyone had to believe you because you deem yourself to be an expert.

I am certainly more expert than either you or Juvenissun, there is doubt about that.

I told you, not true, there IS water down there.
You came back and said, "only 1% of what is on top of the earth."

That is the amount of water held in the earth's crust, and it is 0.3% of that held in the Oceans, if we are going to be accurate.

You appear to be hopelessly muddled about the structure of the earth's interior.

I corrected you again, and I produced a paper that said, "There is a small ocean" down there.

No you didn't. You didn't understand the abstract of the paper you linked to. This isn't free water they are talking about, unless you can access the full paper and show where they are talking about free water as they don't in the abstract.

There is undoubtedly vast amounts of water in the upper mantle, much of it taken down in sediments at subduction zones, this water is not available to be transported backwards and forwards to the surface by any natural phenomena.

Now you've resorted to, "Well, they didn't say it was connected to the flood!" And, "Well, yeah, I knew that for a long time."

Obviously they didn't, they are scientists carrying out good science, not crackpots trying to find evidence for a global flood 4000 years ago.

If you knew it for a long time, why did you deny it earlier?

I don't believe I did, just think you are confused about what this water is and where it is, and that I am not,

And YOU said that even if it was there, it would take a tremendous amount of pressure to force it up.

I don't believe I did say that. I believe it would be impossible to bring to the surface as it isn't free water but part of hydrated minerals.

Ever been to Yellowstone National Park? Happens faithfully there.

Oh dear oh dear, you really don't get it do you?

You are now trying to equate mantle water held in mineral structures with heated ground water in Yellowstone that comes up as Geysers.

Now I really know that you haven't got a clue what you are talking about.

Thanks for making that clear

Or did you forget that steam is super heated water?

Let me check...........

No I didn't

Steam is water that has reached its boiling point and turned to gas, it won't be supper heated at atmospheric pressure.

They do still teach geophysicists that don't they?

They teach it teenage science students.

So, stop being insultingly childish. If you are what you claim you are, it is beneath you.

I enjoy it, and you really bring it on yourself by pontificating about subjects that you don't understand.

If you understood what you were talking about I wouldn't be able to poke fun at your ignorance.

There is a lesson there, be sure of your ground before you make a statement.

If you want to say, "I misspoke when I said there is no water in the core or the crust," then say it, and I'll take the rest of what you claim more seriously.

Point out where I said there is no water in the mantle. Be sure to make the distinction between hydrated minerals and free water though.

I still don't think there is much if any water in the core, I am quite willing to be put straight on that, but as the core is nearly entirely a mixture of Ireon and Nickel, I doubt I am far out

Until that time. I don't take you seriously

Right back at you sweet thing

 

[Baggins]

No. But that only goes back to 70 Ma. What do you know about the tectonics, say at 100 Ma? Where is Hawaii at that time?

May be it just popped up from China?

Maybe the hot spot didn't exist before then.

Maybe you don't know what you are talking about.

Maybe you should learn to back yourself up with evidence before posting.

You don't even appear to have realised how the Hawiian chain of Islands and sea mounts formed or you wouldn't have come up with that " popped up from China " quip.

 

[Baggins]

The people who did the study and said, "There is an small ocean there," were ALSO geologists.

Yes, they used the phrase a small ocean as a device to explain the volumes of water in the mantle. Humans like metaphors like that makes data easy to understand.

What they weren't suggesting is that there is literally a small ocean, i.e. a body of free water, in the mantle.

But I can imagine how that would confuse biblical literallists

You also have to bear in mind that the water taken down into the mantle in subduction zones is also, partly, part of a cycle in which sea water is subducted and then erupted from volcanic chains above the subduction zone to fall as rain and go back to the sea.

 

[Baggins]

Funny,

I've been around super heated, quickly cooled water quite often, and no poached critters.

That is because you and the critters were not in the super heated jet of water and the super heated jet of water dissipated its heat to the surrounding, much cooler atmosphere quickly.

No have a think about why this wouldn't work if you were venting oceans worth of superheated water over a narrow time frame.

Hint there would be no heat sink to dissipate that vast amount of heat you are generating.

This also doesn't answer the question of how you are going to remove water from the minerals that it is bound up in, and then get it to the surface and then return back to the minerals again.

It is admirable to see creationists attempting science, but it is always futile because they are starting from an untenable premis, that the bible is correct in all it says. It brings to mind the quotation of Samuel Johnson about women preachers:

"Sir, a woman's preaching is like a dog's walking on his hind legs. It is not done well; but you are surprised to find it done at all."

Sir, a creationist's science is like a dog's walking on his hind legs. It is not done well; but you are surprised to find it done at all."

 

[AintNoMonkey]

You know, for people who claim to be well versed in geological science, a couple of you (read: creationists) couldn't pass a first semester intro to Geology class. Pathetic. Sorry guys, even an underclassman could recognize how pathetic your understanding is.