Salt in Oceans

They are as common as rain. Even with those who combine ignorance with exuberance and impulsivity, the better solution is probably just to provide accurate information. You mean like the moon dust and shrinking sun arguments that we still regularly see here? And that are not abandoned even after links to webpages at places like AIG that clearly explain these fallacies (e.g., Far Out Claims About Astronomy) are provided?--Percy

Also from the same source is this AIG page about arguments that shouldn't be used. Nevertheless, these arguments continue to come up again and again in discussion from creationists. Many seem to be influenced by Mr. Kent Hovind, Mr. Don Patton, or Mr. Carl Baugh, who make wild claims in their distortion of the evidence.

Yeah well I don't really trust Kent hovind mind you ...

Hi Slevesque,Could you please stop using the "Gen Reply" button when replying to a specific message? Thanks! We weren't talking about you. You claimed that you "have never felt this behavior from creationists at all," meaning creationists who advocated invalid arguments such as those enumerated at AIG and CMI. But you're dead wrong because we see such creationists here all the time, often, as pointed out by Pandion, because they've been influenced by Hovind, Patton or Baugh, and there are other flakes out there, too.Over the breadth of threads in which you're participating you are gradually revealing an increasingly marked disparity between the number of and degree of conviction in your opinions versus the level of your knowledge. The quality of much of your thinking is to be admired, but until your knowledge level increases it would seem that a bit more tentativity is called for.--Percy

Of course if one believes "creation with apparent age" then all things are indeed possible, including that the the earth was created 100 years ago, or even yesterday, for that matter.

you could go one better than that by admitting that your claim has been refuted.

Continuing previous discussion in a more appropriate thread.Reply to Message 60Humphreys adressed both issues. Their present (non-existent) formation, and the issue of even if all that salt did come out of the ocean as an output, what overall effect it has on the math and if this can be claimed to be the missing Sodium sink. Humphrey's calculation show that it would rank third behind past sea spray and cation exchange.So there are two issues concerning the haltite: What processes formed them in the past, and why aren't we witnessing them right now ? After all, the laws of chemistry didn't change since back then.And also, even if we were to include all those salt deposits, it isn't close to being able to account for the missing Sodium sinks. Except that I had asked where you get all those calories, it would be peculiar for you to answer the apple instead of the three course dinner.But you're right, it doesn't contradict this second possibility. Would you be so kind as to now identify what this three course dinner is ? Now, you claim that this Salt deposits comes from the oceans, despite any evidence that chemistry allows for such depositions in our oceans today. Yet you still claimed that it happened in the past.My intuition is that, whatever past mechanism you will propose, it will involved some past catastrophy that will produce the required environment for such depositions, and that oddly enough this environment can probably be produced by some of the events of a world-wide flood.And also, I never claimed all the salt in this salt deposition all came from seawater. It is possible, but I'm not excluding other possible origins. Baseless, provocative assertion that adds nothing to the discussion.

Uh ... they're there.Even if you came up with some argument that I found totally unanswerable "proving" that the saline giants couldn't have formed, I'd still know that you were wrong because they exist. As a matter of fact, they are easy to explain. No, the laws of chemistry didn't change but the situation did. Independent evidence shows that whenever a halite giant formed, it did so in a basin almost completely isolated from the sea. I'm fairly sure that we did this in this thread already. Then I suggest that you fire your intuition and hire a new one. Isolation from the main body of the ocean would not be produced by a event which allegedly connected all the oceans into one big unbroken expanse of ocean. Curiously enough, there's no forum rule against taunting creationists about the vacuity of their beliefs.

My intuition is that salt deposits come from evaporation. Oddly enough, I don't associate evaporation with floods.

---

"It appears that many of you turn to Hebrew to escape the English...." -- Joseppi

Please explain how a flood could produce this. Then we will begin a journey back towards the seas.Edited by jar, : fix subtitle

---

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

Except I never said they couldn't have formed, I asked whatever mechanism you propose, why isn't it happening right now ? Fair enough, but then I'm still left wondering what prevents this from happening right now. Is it such a rare occurence that its not surprising we don't see it in the process right now ? You proposed an output far less then what is actually needed to bring the sodium accumulation to near equilibrium. A Global flood would have many stages, one of this is the receeding stage. This is where the up-until-now-underwater tectonic plates would start to surface out of the water, forcing the water to receed eventually back to the present-day oceans. Of course, in the process, it is not unimaginable that very large quantities of water could be caught in bassins, unable to join the ocean. And there is nothing preventing me from cutting this discussion short, if I am to be served this kind of bullshit from your part. Edited by slevesque, : No reason given.

'Cos a basin of that type doesn't presently exist. Yeah, it's fairly rare. You need a very specific set of circumstances for it to happen. Either the basin has to be connected to the main body of the ocean by a very narrow channel, or it has to be divided from it by a permeable sill, or it has to be divided from it by a sill which is only overtopped at high tide, or ... well, there are a number of models, but obviously what they all have in common is a basin which only just connects to the main body of the ocean.There's no particular reason why there should be such a basin today, and as a matter of fact there isn't. There are all sorts of things wrong with this.First of all, if that was the explanation, then the saline giants would all be on the top, wouldn't they?Second, there's the quantitative aspect. As I pointed out in the other thread, the entire evaporation of a whole kilometer of water would result in only 14 meters of evaporites. To deposit four kilometers of salt you need a continuous process.Then again, the entire evaporation of seawater would result in all the evaporites being deposited. Not just the salt and the gypsum, but the whole kaboodle.Finally, show me your "basins unable to join the ocean". The example I gave in the other thread was the Louann Salt. It's under the Gulf of Mexico, slevesque. Now in real geology there was a time when the Gulf of Mexico was only just barely connected to the rest of the ocean. But how does "flood geology" account for it? You may do as you please, but, really, if you're only willing to discuss "flood geology" with someone who won't make fun of "flood geology", then you may have unwittingly stumbled into the wrong forum, accidentally made over 1,000 posts here, and inadvertently become an admin.Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

Well, it is happening right now, just on a much smaller scale. Right here in southern Saskatchewan, we have salt lakes. Because it's so flat around here, the only outlet is evaporation. So, in wet years, they're full of water and in dry years there's nothing but salt. Every time the water evaporates, the salt remains. Eventually, after millions of cycles, you can get quite a thick layer.It's no mystery how the salt got there. It just takes a very long time.

---

"It appears that many of you turn to Hebrew to escape the English...." -- Joseppi

Playa lakes are one thing and saline giants are another.Saline giants are huge. The Louann Salt extends over 800,000 square kilometers and is 4 kilometers deep. We're not talking about the same process here.That sort of thing is not happening right now. The formation of playas is not the same thing on a smaller scale, it's a completely different thing.

How are they different?

---

"It appears that many of you turn to Hebrew to escape the English...." -- Joseppi