Walt Brown and the Hydroplate theory.

dad

Undefeated!
Supporter
Jan 17, 2005
44,904
1,261
✟25,524.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
It's always struck me as odd that people would set up their religious beliefs to be dependent on science being wrong.

Especially since in the history of science vs religion, I can't think of a single time when religion won.
It didn't win over Jesus.
 
Upvote 0

Job 33:6

Well-Known Member
Jun 15, 2017
7,232
2,786
Hartford, Connecticut
✟293,063.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Suppose plate subduction. At about 2.3 cm per year. Slow and gradual.

Now imagine two freight trains on the same tracks in a hard rock cut with open air on the top . Rock on three sides.

Moving at the same 2.3 cm speed.

One is loaded with basalt. The other Granite.

Which train is going to dive underground. into the Subduction zone?

How does a small rock, ocean crust, brittle slide under a bigger rock. When the path of least resistance is simply to pile up.

The basalt train would pile up. As its mass is not as strong.

"How does a small rock, ocean crust, brittle slide under a bigger rock. When the path of least resistance is simply to pile up. "

This doesn't make any sense.
Imagine if I have two apples and I put them into a bowl of water. And let's say that one apple is slightly more dense than the other.

Part of each apple rises above the surface of the water.

If I run the apples into one another, one apple attempts to rise into the air, while the more dense apple sinks.

In the real world, oceanic lithosphere is chemically altered during subduction, resulting in an increased density, which essentially pulls oceanic lithosphere into the mantle.

It would be akin to the Apple that sinks, slightly increasing to a density greater than water and being pulled down in.

So, while the Apple that rises into the air can rise some amount, ultimately, the denser apple goes underwater, thus removing further displacement of the lighter apple into the air.

The lighter apple isn't going to go up into the air because the denser apple is predominantly sinking under water.

Just the same, the continental lithosphere isn't going up into the atmosphere because your oceanic lithosphere is being pulled into the mantle.

There is also the driving force behind the subducting lithosphere, which continues to push, further driving subduction along with the increasing densities pull.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Job 33:6

Well-Known Member
Jun 15, 2017
7,232
2,786
Hartford, Connecticut
✟293,063.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Suppose plate subduction. At about 2.3 cm per year. Slow and gradual.

Now imagine two freight trains on the same tracks in a hard rock cut with open air on the top . Rock on three sides.

Moving at the same 2.3 cm speed.

One is loaded with basalt. The other Granite.

Which train is going to dive underground. into the Subduction zone?

How does a small rock, ocean crust, brittle slide under a bigger rock. When the path of least resistance is simply to pile up.

The basalt train would pile up. As its mass is not as strong.

And to go back to the train analogy, the flaw in the analogy is that trains, never at any point in time, have a greater density than the earth which they drive on.

A train will never sink into the earth as an oceanic crust would, because a train is far less dense than underlying bedrock.

But in the case of oceanic lithosphere, it's greatest density is higher than the lowest density of the upper mantle. Thus it sinks in conjunction with the pushing force of body of the train.

And the continental crust/lighter train, will not fly up into the atmosphere, because it isn't being directly displaced by the sinking oceanic crust/more dense train.
 
Upvote 0

Job 33:6

Well-Known Member
Jun 15, 2017
7,232
2,786
Hartford, Connecticut
✟293,063.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
I still don't understand the nature of the claim that strata should just go up into the atmosphere.

A. We have seismic mapping showing us subduction.
Regional-WNW-ESE-trending-cross-section-showing-the-configuration-of-the-subducted.png


https://www.visionlearning.com/img/library/large_images/image_5579.png
And
B. Where else would strata be going if not into the earth?
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

USincognito

a post by Alan Smithee
Supporter
Dec 25, 2003
42,058
16,810
Dallas
✟870,741.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Upvote 0

dad

Undefeated!
Supporter
Jan 17, 2005
44,904
1,261
✟25,524.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
This response misses the point. :/
Religion did not win over Jesus. That hits the point on the head.

The hydroplate theory was great and hit a lot of points that had a lot of truth. Like how the continents separated fast, how the fountains of the deep may have shot debris out with the erupting water, and etc. I used that book in developing a lot of ideas. The weakness in that theory was trying to use our present laws and nature and explain it all within that framework.
 
Upvote 0

pitabread

Well-Known Member
Jan 29, 2017
12,920
13,372
Frozen North
✟329,323.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Private
Religion did not win over Jesus. That hits the point on the head.

I don't know what this is supposed to mean.

The hydroplate theory was great and hit a lot of points that had a lot of truth. Like how the continents separated fast, how the fountains of the deep may have shot debris out with the erupting water, and etc. I used that book in developing a lot of ideas. The weakness in that theory was trying to use our present laws and nature and explain it all within that framework.

Yeah, yeah, I'm familiar with your "everything in the past is magical" shtick. You can save it.
 
Upvote 0

Markstrimaran

Active Member
May 19, 2019
97
19
Midwest
✟17,499.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
The lighter apple isn't going to go up into the air because the denser apple is predominantly sinking under water.

I would hope that the USGS might someday build a drill rig capable of drilling deeper than 7 miles. We can go to Mars, and build a 20 billion dollar particle accelerator.
If we could only get a core sample from a 50 mile deep hole. To find out if water is a good analogy for 800F mantle.
 
Upvote 0

Markstrimaran

Active Member
May 19, 2019
97
19
Midwest
✟17,499.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Job 33:6

Well-Known Member
Jun 15, 2017
7,232
2,786
Hartford, Connecticut
✟293,063.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Thanks for posting , What county is this map from?

It says where it is on the figure.

This isn't new though. Subduction zones have been mapped in many places.
 
Upvote 0

Ophiolite

Recalcitrant Procrastinating Ape
Nov 12, 2008
8,521
9,493
✟236,458.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Private
View attachment 258376
Do you have any seismic charts like this. The one with the dots is something I would not want to bet my 401k on.
I was going to ask you why not, then I realised the answer. You have practically zero education in or knowledge of seismology. The "one with the dots" provides evidence of subduction of the oceanic crust. Your one doesn't. It captures nicely the structure of the lithosphere, but it does not demonstrate the dynamics of plate tectonics.
 
Upvote 0

Job 33:6

Well-Known Member
Jun 15, 2017
7,232
2,786
Hartford, Connecticut
✟293,063.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Last edited:
  • Informative
Reactions: Astrophile
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

stevevw

inquisitive
Nov 4, 2013
12,572
949
Brisbane Qld Australia
✟243,871.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
IMO....the most plausible of all flood theories that I have encountered.
Bryan Nickel
Yeah the theory brings up some interesting facts like the smooth layers in the canyon with little sign of erosion. I find the funnel an interesting feature where it looks like the canyon begins where a massive amount of water seems to have been released suddenly washing away the layers exposing the Vermilion and Echo cliffs. From memory I think the theory mentions there were a couple of big lakes which gave way causing the funnel. There is a big crack with offshoots called Marbel canyon which has some strange narrow canyons too deep and narrow to be caused by erosion. There is evidence of swirls showing water was released under very high pressure which left impressions on the walls and floor of the canyons. The way the canyon then takes a hard right turn after Marbel canyon up and over the Kaibab Plateau which is hard to explain if it was created by a slow carving river which could not flow uphill. The pot holes at the top of the canyon walls where it looks like fast flowing water was creating plug holes and the butts where the great lakes use to be all seem to point to some sort of big event causing a sudden release of water.
grand%2Bcanyon.jpg
 
Upvote 0

Job 33:6

Well-Known Member
Jun 15, 2017
7,232
2,786
Hartford, Connecticut
✟293,063.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
"The way the canyon then takes a hard right turn after Marbel canyon up and over the Kaibab Plateau which is hard to explain if it was created by a slow carving river which could not flow uphill. "

Water may not flow uphill, but of course land can rise around water, making it appear as if water had flown up hill to get to the other side of a mound.

Imagine a stream starting at point A, flowing through point B and ending at point C. If point B topographically rises (but water elevation stays the same), water erodes through the land as it rises. And in the end you are left with water flowing from point A to C as it always has, but with a mound around point B, as if water had flown over a mound, but in reality never had.

This is known as tectonic uplift in the theory of plate tectonics. It is commonly observed in nature.

If the canyon is believed to have formed predominantly from a high energy global flood, this would contradict the hydroplate hypothesis. If you're simply commenting on ideas of small local floods, then i suppose that is fine. I wouldn't disagree with small ice dams resulting in rapid erosion on a local scale.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: Jimmy D
Upvote 0

Subduction Zone

Regular Member
Dec 17, 2012
32,628
12,068
✟230,461.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Yeah the theory brings up some interesting facts like the smooth layers in the canyon with little sign of erosion. I find the funnel an interesting feature where it looks like the canyon begins where a massive amount of water seems to have been released suddenly washing away the layers exposing the Vermilion and Echo cliffs. From memory I think the theory mentions there were a couple of big lakes which gave way causing the funnel. There is a big crack with offshoots called Marbel canyon which has some strange narrow canyons too deep and narrow to be caused by erosion. There is evidence of swirls showing water was released under very high pressure which left impressions on the walls and floor of the canyons. The way the canyon then takes a hard right turn after Marbel canyon up and over the Kaibab Plateau which is hard to explain if it was created by a slow carving river which could not flow uphill. The pot holes at the top of the canyon walls where it looks like fast flowing water was creating plug holes and the butts where the great lakes use to be all seem to point to some sort of big event causing a sudden release of water.
grand%2Bcanyon.jpg

The claims by creationists about "no erosion" at uncomformities is simply false. Yes, locally one can find areas where it looks as if there was little to no erosion to the untrained eye since there is a relatively flat transition from one stratum to another. But one can find all sorts of places where the land is very flat today. Erosion is occurring there but very very slowly. Go to the Fargo North Dakota area. Altitudes there often change by only one foot every mile, or even less. If the area was resubmerged and deposition began again a very flat unconformity would be formed.

And how many times does the strawman of a river flowing uphill have to be refuted? I am sure that you have heard the refutation. If one repeats that claim after being corrected one is simply lying at that point. That whole plateau has undergone massive uplift. Ironically uplift even exists in the misnamed "hydroplate theory". There is some massive cognitive dissonance going on among those that accept the "hydroplate theory" and ignore that fact when it comes to a sane explanation of what occured.

Lastly the landforms of the Grand Canyon tell us that they are not due to a flood. One can see massive embedded meanders. Those do not exist in a gorge cut by a sudden flood. Those canyons are relatively straight. The only explanation that does not repeatedly refute itself is the standard explanation. Which explains all of the evidence. You are relying on a Wild Donkeyed Guess. Also called a WAG. It is merely a massive self contradicting ad hoc explanation with no scientific evidence for it at all.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Job 33:6
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

stevevw

inquisitive
Nov 4, 2013
12,572
949
Brisbane Qld Australia
✟243,871.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
The claims by creationists about "no erosion" at uncomformities is simply false. Yes, locally one can find areas where it looks as if there was little to no erosion to the untrained eye since there is a relatively flat transition from one stratum to another. But one can find all sorts of places where the land is very flat today. Erosion is occurring there but very very slowly. Go to the Fargo North Dakota area. Altitudes there often change by only one foot every mile, or even less. If the area was resubmerged and deposition began again a very flat unconformity would be formed.

And how many times does the strawman of a river flowing uphill have to be refuted? I am sure that you have heard the refutation. If one repeats that claim after being corrected one is simply lying at that point. That whole plateau has undergone massive uplift. Ironically uplift even exists in the misnamed "hydroplate theory". There is some massive cognitive dissonance going on among those that accept the "hydroplate theory" and ignore that fact when it comes to a sane explanation of what occured.

Lastly the landforms of the Grand Canyon tell us that they are not due to a flood. One can see massive embedded meanders. Those do not exist in a gorge cut by a sudden flood. Those canyons are relatively straight. The only explanation that does not repeatedly refute itself is the standard explanation. Which explains all of the evidence. You are relying on a Wild Donkeyed Guess. Also called a WAG. It is merely a massive self-contradicting ad hoc explanation with no scientific evidence for it at all.
First off I am not relying on any ideas but rather asking or posing questions I think are relevant ones considering what we see. I don't necessarily support the hydroplate theory but rather find some of the things it brings up very interesting. I'm not disputing the evidence for the slow erosion of the canyon as I don't believe in a young earth or a global flood in the first place.

What I am interested in is the strange anomalies in the canyon. For example how the big funnel shape occurs which takes out a massive chunk of land area between Vermilion and Echo cliffs and leaves a large funnel shape like it was washed away in one go. The resulting barbed valleys are too deep and narrow to be eroded. These narrow valleys are said to be cracks that were caused by water pressure from underneath which was forced through the cracks creating the strange marks on the walls.

img_3931-150x150.jpg
img_3872-150x150.jpg
grand-canyon-lake-funnel-hydroplate-walt-brown.jpg
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0