quote:
Originally posted by Tranquility Base:
John: How can you say so confidently that 'The mechanisms of plate tectonics are moving massive lumps of rock around the planet. Accelerate them quickly, as you would have to do, and those big lumps will be pulverized. We do not observe this.'
TB: In our scenario we are probably talking about a much hotter, and therefore less viscous, mantle as well as perhaps a more pliable crust.
Yes, so hot in fact, that the earth would be sterilized of all life, land-, sea- and ark-dwelling. We would have evidence in the volcanic record, expressed as different compositions, textures and areal extent, but these do not exist. Have you not been reading our posts, TB?
quote:
I wont try to pretend fro a second that anyone has proven this but neither can we pretend it has been ruled out. We can't even pretend that the data doesn't even tell this story! Do you really think geologists can always look at rocks and tell how they formed? It's done by fitting to a framework, it's not 'ab initio' or 'first principles'.
It has been ruled out. You go and find me regional ultramafic ash flows and continent scale ophiolites, and maybe I'll begin to listen. There is no evidence for any unusual volcanic activity of the type that would occur under your scenario.
quote:
The continents would of course automatically gradually slow down by friction once the cooling began winning over the heating.
When did this happen? Why did the plates not start sliding around sooner? What was the rate of cooling? What was the mechanism for heating? Give us data!
quote:
The pre-flood sediments were sitting on top of the continents - they just took a ride - and yes they did get folded, twisted and rifted. Take a look at any geology textbook.
Gee, how did pre-flood sediments get on the continents? What about the later sediments, how did they get folded? Are you saying that mainstream geology does not have an explanation? Why do you dismiss it so casually?
quote:
And the continents did sink! It is known by mainstream science that vast areas of continents sank at the same time (leading to horizontal drops across vast areas) by 1000s and 1000s of feet!
How do you know that they sank? Why couldn't sea level simply rise? And once it has done so, how is that evidence for a global flood? We're dying out here for lack of data, TB.
quote:
Without performing any detailed calculations passive cooling may have been sufficient.
Might'a been. But let's ignore any details, eh? This is your whole problem TB, no details, no calculations, no data, no evidence, nothing.
quote:
I looked at Joe's web page and I just don't have the time yet to do the maths. In any case I don't think he takes accelerated decay into account there because Baumgardner's model of runaway subduction is a pre-acc-decay idea.
This has been addressed elsewhwre. Once again, there is no EVIDENCE for accelerated decay, just a bunch of might'a beens and could'a beens; along with a whole bunch of wishful thinking.
quote:
Your full grown forests have in some cases been shown to be explainable by burial of log debris. Such floating log mats automatically insert vertically into sludge. You have all ignored that fact.
No. This is NOT a fact. Several rooted forests have been found in succession. Believe it or not, geologists reason these things out. Please give us specifics and we will explain it to you.
quote:
The Siberian trap volcanism occurred during the flood and is found exactly where it is now!
Wow, must be a miracle. Thousands of cubic kilometers of basalt didn't move! Another creationist revelation and a sure fire death blow to evolution!
quote:
We explain everything exactly as you do except it happened in a short time. Lava flows are interspersed with sedimentation. It's only mainstream bias that translates these data automatically into long ages!
You do not have the time nor the mechanisms unless you suspend the laws of nature. There is no evidence for such mechanisms.
quote:
The air quality would have been pretty ordinary during the flood.
LOL! Look at what the relatively small eruption of Laki in 1783 did. Can you imagine this multiplied thousands of times? Look at the eruption of Toba, the largest eruption during the existence of mannkind, and yet miniscule compared to the magnitude of eruptions you must envision.
quote:
If catastrophic rains deposit a 100o feet of non-marine sediments from the highlands into a basin in between marine surges then why would a marine surge wash it all away?
How does this happen? How do floods deposit thousands of feet of sediment in the highlands?
quote:
A global band of salty sediment? We see about five near global bands of salty sediment! The majority of the geological column on land is salty sediment! We don't see one entirely global layer only because of erosion.
Wrong. We don't see it because there is no evidence that it was ever deposited. There is no time in geological history when there were no coarse grained terrigenous sediments being deposited somewhere. Those clastics had to be eroded from an emergent land mass.
quote:
The surges were probably tectonically driven causing ocean basin size changes just as you yourselves believe. We go by the same model as you. I'm not kidding. So the water goes back into the ocean because of a tectonic event that made the ocean bigger again - probably a plate subduction slippage.
Well, not really, but that is irrelvant at this point. You have no evidence for a global flood.
quote:
The fossils are something that would ultimately need to be explained in detail.
No. Everything needs to be explained in detail. Mainstream science does this. Why should you be exempt?
quote:
I am personally satisfied that our 3-point explanation could achieve the known ordering and that the gross ordering is already consistent with qualitative expectations.
Details, please.
quote:
Most of your argument is based on claiming that you can estimate whether the event could have occurred quickly and yielded the same data.
Actually, not. The argument is based on the fact that there are not the rock types, compositions and physical properties necessary to make your scenario remotely possible.
quote:
Since this is a such a different paradigm your statements primarily amount to 'I don't think it would work'.
Not at all. See above. We are asking for evidence of a flood, not more just-so stories.
™ Version 4.2
