Source of water for the flood

[Baggins]

If so, then your wife will never have any diamond ring to wear. Oh, I forgot that she could buy an artificial one today.

To confuse you more, if it were so, we would not have any land to stand on. The earth would a true water world.

The water in the mantle is held as hydrated minerals. This thread is about where the water for the fantasy flood came from, there is no natural mechanism to get the water from hydrated minerals to the earths surface and back, therefore it is pointless to the discussion.

You could say that god took the water from the mantle and put it back, but then you could claim that god created the water from nothing and poofed it back to nothing for all the good it will do you in a scientific discussion.

Oh, and diamonds are almost completely formed from carbon:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diamond

And the fact that small amounts of mantle rock are found at or near the earths surface doesn't make your claims that H2O from hydrated mantle minerals could have formed the water for Noah's flood any less of a fantasy.

 

[Baggins]

It is complicate. It would take me a while if I choose to answer them, and frankly, no one knows the details for sure so far.

An extremely rough idea is called "fractionation". That is why we got so called the hydrothermal deposit.

The hard part of your question is on the rate. We do know kimberlitic magma is very wet and erupted very very quickly (incredibly fast). The water in kimberlitic magma must have accumulated in the asthenosphere for a long time. Beside, it is not likely that water would tickle up. It must have gone up in an eruption style. What would this water do as it accumulates in the mantle is anybody's guess. That is why the idea of "accelerated tectonics" is not only still around, but is getting hotter.

If you could imagine the early earth had a much faster pace on all these processes, it is not impossible that a lot of water could erupted in a pretty short period of time. We know a similar process is probably still active on Venus today.

Also, once the water is out, it will not go back to the mantle. Why do you suggest that it will be back?

Because that is where it is today and the mantle is saturated.

Also your idea would poach Noah and his family very nicely even if it wasn't a chemical and geological impossibility, there have been massive volcanic episodes before such as the Deccan traps and although they produce vast amounts of water it is nothing compared to teh amount of water in the seas.

You are living in a fantasy land and you admit yourself there is no mechanism to get this water to the surface, and even if you could it would turn the earth's atmosphere into a pressure cooker that would kill every living thing on the planet, including someone on a boat.

Epic fail.

 

[thaumaturgy]

It is complicate. It would take me a while if I choose to answer them, and frankly, no one knows the details for sure so far.

I am a geochemist and Baggins is a geologist. I would like to see the explanation!

An extremely rough idea is called "fractionation". That is why we got so called the hydrothermal deposit.

Fractionation, as in fractional crystallization? Hydrothermal deposits do indeed form from the late-stage crystallization of elements that don't like to hang out in more common higher temp minerals (as in pegmatite deposits), and indeed these phases often contain hydrous minerals, but as you know, these hydrothermal deposits are largely felsic if I recall. So what does this have to do with ultramafics like lherzolite?

I'm even more curious now about the mechanisms you propose.

The hard part of your question is on the rate. We do know kimberlitic magma is very wet and erupted very very quickly (incredibly fast).

Not just rate but quantities as well. If you wish to simultaneously erupt kimberlite pipes up through the crust all over the world, and then remobilize not just the intra-crystalline water but the water from thermal decomposition of hydroxides then you will have quite a catastrophe on your hands.

The water in kimberlitic magma must have accumulated in the asthenosphere for a long time. Beside, it is not likely that water would tickle up. It must have gone up in an eruption style. What would this water do as it accumulates in the mantle is anybody's guess. That is why the idea of "accelerated tectonics" is not only still around, but is getting hotter.

Could you do me a great favor on this, please list specifically which mineral phases you are discussing here as well as what the nature of the water is that is in these phases.

Not all water is the same in a crystal. Some of it comes out only with a great deal of work and heat, some may be adsorbed and some may be absorbed.

I need to know how much (on a molar percentage) we are talking here is in your water budget.

If you could imagine the early earth had a much faster pace on all these processes, it is not impossible that a lot of water could erupted in a pretty short period of time.

Any evidence for this "accelerated tectonics"?

We know a similar process is probably still active on Venus today.

Venus, last I heard, has a very strange tectonics that basically amounts to "repaving" the surface every couple tens of millions of years. What evidence do we have of global flood basalts on earth? We do have localized wide-extent flood basalts, but not like Venus.

Also, once the water is out, it will not go back to the mantle. Why do you suggest that it will be back?

Well, considering that we are alive today on dry land, it had to go somewhere. You wish to remobilize all the water in the mantle, and it's there today (or you wouldn't have a water budget for this particular mental exercise) so either you are assuming there was EVEN MORE water available and it just disappeared after the Flood or it went back there.

 

[thaumaturgy]

The water in kimberlitic magma must have accumulated in the asthenosphere for a long time. Beside, it is not likely that water would tickle up. It must have gone up in an eruption style.

I'm not sure of the point here but I would like to point out that it is likely that some surface water on the planet did indeed come from volcanic activity remobilizing water from the interior to the cooler exterior. I believe this is often called juvenile water.

So I don't think anyone is going to deny that there is some water sourced from the interior of the earth. But the numbers others have posted about the relative amount of this water means you are going to have to do a much more thorough accounting for your water-budget.

As Baggins points out, you will poach all living creatures (Noah included) in massive nearly simultaneous eruptions of kimberlite pipes all over the planet releasing huge sums of water, not to mention the massive increases in atmospheric pressures crushing the bodies of Noah and family. But also there's still the need to account for the form of the water you wish to pull out of the mantle;

hydrous minerals
hydroxyl groups

 

[Molal]

Juvenile Water:

Water that is new to the hydrologic cycle. Brought to Earth's surface through volcanic eruptions.

Like thau and baggins, I am a geologist (structural geologist), I would love to hear your discussion and review your evidence as quoted here:

It is complicate. It would take me a while if I choose to answer them, and frankly, no one knows the details for sure so far.

Also, i would like to hear your discussion and review your evidence for fractionation. There are many different modes of fractionation from fractionating oxygen isotopes in the atmosphere, to fractionating crude oil, fractionating alcohol from water, magmatic fractionation, etc. You need to provide much more detail so as we stay on the same page.

Thanks

 

[thaumaturgy]

OK, now we have an excellent class roster:

A petroleum geologist/paleontologist
A structural geologist
and a geochemist

Juvenissun can get as detailed as he likes with this complicated issue.

So far I've been a bit intrigued by Juvenissun because he's throwing around a lot higher level terminology related to geology than most YEC or Flood Advocates.

Will this be the poster to provide us some meat for the discussion?

I am really interested now.

 

[Molal]

OK, now we have an excellent class roster:

A petroleum geologist/paleontologist
A structural geologist
and a geochemist

Juvenissun can get as detailed as he likes with this complicated issue.

So far I've been a bit intrigued by Juvenissun because he's throwing around a lot higher level terminology related to geology than most YEC or Flood Advocates.

Will this be the poster to provide us some meat for the discussion?

I am really interested now.

I hope so. I can't wait.....

It's funny to get so many geologists together on a board like this.

 

[thaumaturgy]

I hope so. I can't wait.....

It's funny to get so many geologists together on a board like this.

Well, I hope we haven't heard the last from Juvenissun. He hasn't bothered to provide us with a response, but he was able to post stuff on the "Flood" over in General Theology this morning. (He even makes this interesting claim:

Without a global flood, we will not be here.

(ibid)

I really do hope he does return here. I am so dreadfully tired of Creationists or YEC or Flood Advocates who hint at some meaty science and promise "complicated" material only to, when faced with one or more geologists, just never revisits the topic again.

It's getting tiring. Please Juvenissun, rise above the noise to give us a real signal!

 

[juvenissun]

Well, I hope we haven't heard the last from Juvenissun. He hasn't bothered to provide us with a response, but he was able to post stuff on the "Flood" over in General Theology this morning. (He even makes this interesting claim:

(ibid)

I really do hope he does return here. I am so dreadfully tired of Creationists or YEC or Flood Advocates who hint at some meaty science and promise "complicated" material only to, when faced with one or more geologists, just never revisits the topic again.

It's getting tiring. Please Juvenissun, rise above the noise to give us a real signal!

Heck, I am still here. It is Sunday and I have a lot things to do. I was only pick a simple thread in OT to say a few words.

 

[thaumaturgy]

Heck, I am still here. It is Sunday and I have a lot things to do. I was only pick a simple thread in OT to say a few words.

Excellent! I am really looking forward to some more details on the water from the Mantle!

 

[AV1611VET]

I have a feeling you're gonna fall on your rear-end, Juvenissun (and deservedly so), if you're gonna attempt to explain where this water came from via natural means. Factor God out, and your local scientific atheists here will factor you through a Veg-o-Matic. [Just giving you some brotherly advice. ] If you can't bring it around to "God did it" --- stay home.

 

[BrainHertz]

I have a feeling you're gonna fall on your rear-end, Juvenissun (and deservedly so), if you're gonna attempt to explain where this water came from via natural means. Factor God out, and your local scientific atheists here will factor you through a Veg-o-Matic. [Just giving you some brotherly advice. ] If you can't bring it around to "God did it" --- stay home.

Agreed. I think this is roughly what I said at #4...

 

[AV1611VET]

Agreed. I think this is roughly what I said at #4...

Indeed --- but I hate that word "magic" as it applies to God. That's just disrespectful on so many levels.

 

[Paulos23]

Indeed --- but I hate that word "magic" as it applies to God. That's just disrespectful on so many levels.

Why not? That is just about what it is equivalent to.

 

[thaumaturgy]

I have a feeling you're gonna fall on your rear-end, Juvenissun (and deservedly so), if you're gonna attempt to explain where this water came from via natural means. Factor God out, and your local scientific atheists here will factor you through a Veg-o-Matic. [Just giving you some brotherly advice. ] If you can't bring it around to "God did it" --- stay home.

So are you some sort of evangelist for ignorance? Why are you suggesting he not bring to bear some much-needed science discussion?

Look, AV, you may dislike science but that isn't every Christian.

Oh, and please, forego telling us what a "blessing" scientists are from God. You have repeatedly made statements that go directly against what scientists do. Remember what you like to say:

"Evidence can take a hike"
"If it disagrees with the KJV it's wrong"

Those two statements can be translated into:

"Hey Scientists, stop doing science."

So, please, keep your anti-science feelings to yourself.

Your scientific illiteracy is not useful here. If you dislike the science (because you can't even begin to understand that which doesn't even interest you) why don't you keep quiet?

If your God wants you "barefoot and dumb", then by all means, move into a cave and set up your little alter and pray the days away. The rest of us would like to look around a bit.

 

[BrainHertz]

Indeed --- but I hate that word "magic" as it applies to God. That's just disrespectful on so many levels.

Why? By what mechanism do you propose supernatural entities cause supernatural events?

 

[Nitron]

No, I agree with AV. It's using ridicule to make an argument look less viable.

 

[Molal]

Indeed --- but I hate that word "magic" as it applies to God. That's just disrespectful on so many levels.

I agree with you AV, for me, magic implies slight-of-hand, illusion and sleeve-dwelling flowers. This is not my God.

 

[Loudmouth]

The hard part of your question is on the rate. We do know kimberlitic magma is very wet and erupted very very quickly (incredibly fast).

If this magma is made up of 1%-2% water it would require a massive amount of magma. Noah should have built a boat out of asbestos, not wood.

The water in kimberlitic magma must have accumulated in the asthenosphere for a long time.

The atmosphere can only hold a specific amount of water. You would need to increase the atmospheric pressure and temperature to extremes in order for it to hold enough moisture. Such pressures and temperatures would make life impossible. You would make Ark soup.

That is why the idea of "accelerated tectonics" is not only still around, but is getting hotter.

Accelerated tectonics would produce so much heat that the earth would turn to molten slag. That's a big problem.

If you could imagine the early earth had a much faster pace on all these processes, it is not impossible that a lot of water could erupted in a pretty short period of time. We know a similar process is probably still active on Venus today.

Rocks don't float on water.

Also, once the water is out, it will not go back to the mantle. Why do you suggest that it will be back?

The water is returned in subduction zones.

 

[RobertByers]

The Earth was probably flat? Not according to the Bible.

Gen7:17 For forty days the flood kept coming on the earth, and as the waters increased they lifted the ark high above the earth. 18 The waters rose and increased greatly on the earth, and the ark floated on the surface of the water. 19 They rose greatly on the earth, and all the high mountains under the entire heavens were covered. ​

At the very least Mount Ararat was covered--- at 5,137 meters (16,854 FT or 3.2 miles above sea level) it is not a high mountain---The 100 highest mountains in the world all top 7,000 meters.

In any case, it would take 2.08 X 10^9 cubic kilometers of water to cover the Earth to the height of Mount Ararat. That is 1.63 times as much water in all the world's oceans, 1.321 X 10^9 cubic kilometers.


But you're obviously a little rusty on your Bible.

The mts of Ararat may of been pushed up by the colliding continents. If they were there already, unlikely, then its high but not as much as greater mts around the world. The point is we don't know or need presume the mts with us now were with us before the flood. In fact their creation demands they were not pr-flood as they should be thrown under continental collisions.
A much, much more shallow sea world around the globe should be predicted and it settles water issues somewhat.
Rob Byers