Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
But a sudden outpouring of water, Noah-style, is not likely even if the balance does tilt to a greater outflow. Rather it would be a gradual change on geological timescales, which would affect only our most distant descendants. Perhaps by then they will have evolved gills.
From your second link...
Quote:
The Great Blue Hole was formed as a limestone cave system during the last glacial period when sea levels were much lower. As the ocean began to rise again, the caves flooded, and the roof collapsed
It's also true that you've said only a handful of people have "seen" the Ark. If you're counting fingers and thumb, that's about 5 people. And if you tally up the number of people who have claimed to have seen it, the number gets considerably larger. So either you're wrong about the small number of people who claim to have seen the Ark, or there are a lot of people blowing hot air and pipe dreams.
Thanks for explaining the "vents". Windows running along the top of the Ark? If you simply mean openings, you're overlooking a significant problem. Since the account is that it rained nonstop for 40 days and 40 nights, enough to flood the planet to presumably covering even the highest mountains (the Himalayas), then a tremendous volume of water would have flooded into the Ark (through the vents and windows), filling the lower deck first and drowning the animals, then ultimately sinking the boat in a short time. Did Noah have pumps on board to remove all the water to avert disaster?
You pointed out Photo #5, in the link you provided, to compare the similarity of the illustration of the Ark. How on earth can you make anything out from that tiny thumbnail photo? I can't make out anything from it. All I can see is that the text claims something is there in the photo. Really? Where?
Well of course, you are assuming it rained on every square inch of the planet. The Bible said it rained, yet it did not give the details of that rain. So naturally, you assume it must of rained so much in the area of the Ark, that it would sink the Ark. And by doing so, you now have confidence that the Ark story could not be true. However, such confidence can only be imbraced, based on a belief of the unknow.
And if that picture was 20 foot by 20 foot, no doubt, you would have some other reason to deny it's existance. Now at 59 years of age, my vision is not the best. Yet, I can make out that objects shape, and I can also just make out the top of the object in that photo. And it looks to me, that there does appear to be somekind of running vent, or windows. No doubt, if that picture was a proof for evolution, your eyesight would improve by 100%. LOL
When I said there were only a handfull of people who saw the Ark up close, I was not counting fingers. That was an expression of speech. I believe over the years a number of people saw the Ark. Yet, only a few were still alive in recent times to give their account. And of those few, their stories matched, even in the finer details. And it is because of such matching details, one who is seeking the truth, should not ignore their statements.
Science does not know how much water is in the mantle. In spite of your leaping on a proposal (not even hypothesis) nothing has been proven.
Think about this....If what that proposal says is true....(There may be more water in the mantle then there is in the oceans) What do you suppose would happen to the earths crust should all the water suddenly come to the surface?
I don't know how much water came to the surface during Noah's flood, yet it should be obvious, that during such an occurance we would see the crust of the earth collapse. And as a result of such a collapse, we would be finding sunken cities under the seas today from the past. Consider the link below.
And if that picture was 20 foot by 20 foot, no doubt, you would have some other reason to deny it's existance. Now at 59 years of age, my vision is not the best. Yet, I can make out that objects shape, and I can also just make out the top of the object in that photo. And it looks to me, that there does appear to be somekind of running vent, or windows. No doubt, if that picture was a proof for evolution, your eyesight would improve by 100%. LOL
Don't hand me that garbage in trying to pass the buck to evolution! It's a tiny thumbnail-sized photo for crying out loud! Instead of hurling presumptuous insulting comments, why don't you simply try to explain where in the photo the blasted object is? I see 'things' in the photo, but I don't see anything that resembles an Ark with a running vent. And yes, it would be much easier if the photo was larger than to play childish guessing games. Is there a larger photo of it that you know of?
If there was enough rain falling nonstop for 40 days and 40 nights, then yes, I would say plenty of water would be pouring in through open windows, and vents with openings large enough for a small cow to walk through. That's not to mention any winds that would have also accompanied such a storm. If there was enough rainfall to flood the Earth and kill every living person, every living animal and... every living bird, then it would indeed have been a very significant storm. It wouldn't have been light sprinkles. You're talking about an event so catastrophic that it killed everything left on the planet, and covered the entire surface including mountains. After all, you're convinced the Ark landed on Mount Ararat in Turkey, aren't you?
You are debating with a confirmed and practicing delsuionalists He is wearing you down with his utter nonsense, and complete lack of reason, and some fairy tale explanation in some desperate attempt to explain away fact, physics, and reality.
He delivered the cue de gras to me when he stated that noah had dinasours aboard the big boat. I mean, like really dude, that is so far from any reasonable thinking I can't respond I think I read people and their agenda's pretty well, but this level requires professional help.
Oh he's not wearing me down at all...I threw the info in my last post at him to see what his response would be...I was rewarded with the collapse of the earths crust is the reason for mythical under sea cities....My laugh for today.
Regarding Japans "underwater city"..They're all natural," said Robert Schoch, a professor of science and mathematics at Boston University who has dived at the site.
"It's basic geology and classic stratigraphy for sandstones, which tend to break along planes and give you these very straight edges, particularly in an area with lots of faults and tectonic activity." .
Don't hand me that garbage in trying to pass the buck to evolution! It's a tiny thumbnail-sized photo for crying out loud! Instead of hurling presumptuous insulting comments, why don't you simply try to explain where in the photo the blasted object is? I see 'things' in the photo, but I don't see anything that resembles an Ark with a running vent. And yes, it would be much easier if the photo was larger than to play childish guessing games. Is there a larger photo of it that you know of?
If there was enough rain falling nonstop for 40 days and 40 nights, then yes, I would say plenty of water would be pouring in through open windows, and vents with openings large enough for a small cow to walk through. That's not to mention any winds that would have also accompanied such a storm. If there was enough rainfall to flood the Earth and kill every living person, every living animal and... every living bird, then it would indeed have been a very significant storm. It wouldn't have been light sprinkles. You're talking about an event so catastrophic that it killed everything left on the planet, and covered the entire surface including mountains. After all, you're convinced the Ark landed on Mount Ararat in Turkey, aren't you?
I'm sure there is a bigger picture around, yet on that link, they only come in that size. Look at the snow on the upper left. The object starts right below the snow. It's rectangular, and near the top of the object, there appears to be some kind of vents. I will try and see if I can find a bigger photo.
The point I was making about the rain is, we do not know the conditions the Ark found itself in. Yet, if God was behind it's construction, and God was in control of the earths weather. Well, I'm sure God could keep the Ark safe. Just to remind you, Noah was not doing this project on his own.
Oh he's not wearing me down at all...I threw the info in my last post at him to see what his response would be...I was rewarded with the collapse of the earths crust is the reason for mythical under sea cities....My laugh for today.
Regarding Japans "underwater city"..They're all natural," said Robert Schoch, a professor of science and mathematics at Boston University who has dived at the site.
"It's basic geology and classic stratigraphy for sandstones, which tend to break along planes and give you these very straight edges, particularly in an area with lots of faults and tectonic activity." .
Japanese geologists and archaeologist have come to the conclusion that the sunken pyramid off the coast of the island of Yonaguni near Okinawa, Japan is a man-made structure. Japanese scientists have documented marks on the stones that indicate they were hand hewn. And they have even located the tools used in this process. Also other carvings have now been discovered in the same area. And if it was a natural stone formation, there should be a massive amount of rock laying all around the structure, yet, we don't see this.
rifleman said. Suffice to say, if it is placed too far down, it would boil back up real quick-like.
Seismic data suggest, that there may be significant amounts of water in the earths mantle. In the past, science believed that no such water could be found below 200 kilometers. Scientists assumed the rocks would be (TO HOT) to hold water.
But then, Joseph Smyth form the University of Colorado made a startling discovery while studying a mineral called wadsleyite. Smyth's discovery was made, when he learned that wadsleyite only exists at temperatures above a 1000 degrees centigrate, yet even at those temperatures, wadsleyite still had the ability to hold water.
Not AT ALL what he determined, as noted below. This is another TomFooleryFact, (TFF*) slid in where hopefully you won't notice the intentional deception.
and so on you go...
Here again rifleman, your beliefs are based on (OLD SCIENTIFIC DATA). Scientists used to believe water could not be found below 200 killmeters, and that was back in the 1980s. Yet, they can only believe that today, if they are willing to ignore the findings of Joseph Smyth.
Your waterbed theory is lame at best, and that's because it is a poor and to simplistic representation of the dynamics found here in the earth.
_______________________________________
My analogy was hardly lame. It was made to show the role of water in providing real, physical support to the mantle's geology. For what amounts to a near-instant release that a global flood would require, all your fantasy water would have to be readily available, now wouldn't it?
Tom, let's just go back to asking you some basic, logical questions:
Q#1: does the bible not claim all the necessary waters "arrived" within 40 days?
Now: let's examine the link you provided. I need to quote it because pretty soon, in a post or two, you'll be confidently claiming that "Science now agrees that there's massive amounts of readily-available water just under the surface".
So: here we go, a direct cut & paste from your link. I highlighted the important provisos in red, just so you can't easily miss or ignore them:
"According to Smyth, models of the mantle's composition suggest that at the depths where wadsleyite is stable, between half and three-quarters of the material is the right stuff for making this mineral. "If the region between 400 and 525 kilometers were, say, 60 per cent wadsleyite, and that phase was saturated at 3·3 weight per cent, that's ten oceans of water," says Smyth. But Dan Frost, an experimental petrologist at the Carnegie Institution of Washington's Geophysical Laboratory in Washington DC, thinks the mantle could contain even more water.
(rifleman: Wow! So for, so good, huh?. So! Let's just stop here and make another TFF* statement) Frost says that solidified lava that has erupted at mid-ocean ridges contains glass that can be analyzed for water content.
(rifleman: Oh! So it's locked up in glass. OK.) His research team has calculated how much water the lava's parent material in the mantle must have contained. "It ends up being between 100 and 500 parts per million," he says. And if the whole mantle contained 500 parts per million of water, Frost calculates that would be the equivalent of 30 oceans of water. (rifleman: Woo-hoo! Even better, huh? "Science has confirmed...blah blah blah") But there is a catch--mid-ocean ridge basalts form by melting just the top part of the mantle. "The question is, does that reflect the bottom part of the mantle?" says Frost. He believes that the whole mantle is relatively homogeneous in its composition, and that only the mineral structures change with depth. But no one can say for certain whether this is the case. New water-bearing minerals are still being found.
Earlier this year, Smyth's group published their discovery of wadsleyite II, another hydrous phase that may be stable even deeper into the mantle than the first wadsleyite. But as Smyth notes, just because all these phases can hold water doesn't mean that they actually do.
(rifleman: Wait. Wait!! WAIT! That's NOT what I want this cut & paste to say! So I guess I'd better ignore it. Yeah; that's the ticket: ignore what these scientists are saying in the details) For that, you need to check what is really going on in the mantle. The main tool for probing rocks in the mantle is seismology. When an earthquake sends out seismic waves, geophysicists measure how fast the waves pass through mantle rocks. Given the speed of the seismic waves, and some information about how different minerals transmit them, geologists can work out what minerals are present. And since water often slows seismic waves down, they may even be able to tell whether the minerals are wet or dry.
The problem is that nobody knows the seismic properties of the hydrated version of the new minerals." __________________________________________________ __
(rifleman pauses for dramatic effect: " Smythe says:
"So we have no way of looking for seismic evidence of whether the phase is saturated or not," says Smyth.
And fnally: "Many different groups are currently trying to pin down the seismic properties of the new hydrous minerals."
So. Q#2: How do you confidently conclude & state that literally tens of trillions of gallons of freely available, right-near-the-surface water for Noah's pipe dream are there, 400 - 500 km down, and only surfacing as molten glass in volcanic eruptions??
I strongly recommend, Tom, that you actually pre-read what you post for a change (how many times have I asked you to do this? It's now your official homework assignment: don't just blindly post stuff that AiG tells you to!). Next, think about whether you want to pin your next TFF* on that particular link.
This scientist's studies on the micro-composition of a potentially hydrous mineral in no way provides for the necessary trillions of gallons of easily accessible water you mention. Even IF he does eventually confirm it is there in the micro-composition, we also note that in this mineral, it's locked in to it's glassy substance.
Oh, and once it magically gets out....
Q#3: How did God get it back in after the flood, since it's there now? Did He do it with a little syringe, placing it back into this essentially glass material, pico-nano-droplet by pico-nano-droplet?
The final paragraph in this interesting link?
"..what if the balance were to shift, and more water came out than goes in? Obviously the oceans would rise, but the more important effects would be in the atmosphere. "Water is the primary greenhouse gas," notes Jeanloz. If there were a massive build-up of greenhouse gases, he says, it could have a devastating effect on every living creature on Earth.
(rifleman: but here's the one line Tom didn't happen to quote-mine...)
But a sudden outpouring of water, Noah-style, is not likely even if the balance does tilt to a greater outflow. Rather it would be a gradual change on geological timescales, which would affect only our most distant descendants. Perhaps by then they will have evolved gills."
Well thanks then, for this interesting link. But... does it make your point or mine?
See, Tom, you have to come up with something vaguely plausible. You know, like the discovery of a massive underground free-flowing river system.
You selectively quote-mine within some guy's tentative discovery, where even he can't say what's going on, but then you strut around, trumpeting the "science has recently confirmed..." followed by some "blah blah blah" statement that is completely UNSUPPORTED by the very link you provided.
Pretty interesting technique. Very convincing!
And you wonder why we continue to criticize the links and statements you make?
Sigh.
(Quick summary: there's no known or measured source of readily available sub-surface water. Speculations about water's possible participation in the original formation of a deep mineral material, which is then essentially a sealed glass composition, means nothing to this discussion.
Even if there were free and easy water, to quickly evacuate it to the surface would substantially and catastrophically damage, permanently, the Earth's mantle, which is largely supported by internal hydraulic pressure.
You know, like the water in a waterbed does? Do you get that one now, Tom?
Finally, there'd be no plausible means to return it afterward, especially into it's original micro-nano origins. )
Unless, of course, you want to admit it was all done by MAGIC. That's the only possibility for any of Noah's little problems.
Last edited by rifleman; 11-23-2009 at 08:35 AM..
Reason: magic!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
He is wearing you down with his utter nonsense, and complete lack of reason, and some fairy tale explanation in some desperate attempt to explain away fact, physics, and reality.
Tom Foolery Facts (TFF*) run amok!
