|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,914 Year: 4,171/9,624 Month: 1,042/974 Week: 1/368 Day: 1/11 Hour: 0/1 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: The predictions of Walt Brown | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
DrJones* Member Posts: 2290 From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 7.6 |
This is how the creatures were believed quick frozen by Walt What creatures? As others have pointed out, the frozen mammoths we've found were not quick frozen.
where as the heat simply radiated upward Radiation is the least efficient form of heat ransfer. Under your scenario Noah and everyone/thing on the Ark would be dead, deceased, pining for the fjords. *not an actual doctor
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
DrJones* Member Posts: 2290 From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 7.6 |
I guess if material from a ring tended to clump into real big pieces, this would really slow it down Really? So big things like the Space Shuttle just softly float to earth like feathers do they? You're also missing the point that hail falls from within the atmosphere at a relatively low altitude. Any chunks of your proposed ring would be coming in from orbit outside the Earth's atmosphere at a much much higher altitude than hail. If you can't see how the massive difference in altitude cause a massive difference in velocity then you need to go retake simple high school physics. *not an actual doctor
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
DrJones* Member Posts: 2290 From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 7.6 |
Your numbers sound about right. I was just emphasizing to cosmo that ice coming in from orbit would have a much high velocity than simple hail even when you only focus on the altitude.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
DrJones* Member Posts: 2290 From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 7.6 |
If so, is there any hope for even a modest canopy? Define modest, how thick is it? how high is it in the atmosphere? What is its total volume? How is it suspended in the atmosphere in violation of all the laws of physics? *not an actual doctor
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
DrJones* Member Posts: 2290 From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 7.6 |
Sounds like it has more hope than the ring idea, though well it has exactly as much hope as the ring idea, that is of course: none. You can't suspend that much liquid water in the atmosphere.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
DrJones* Member Posts: 2290 From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 7.6 |
Even if it's way up there? How high is too high? Besides, what do you mean by "that much"? Maybe I don't think there is near 'that much'! Well how much water do you think was in this canopy? How high in the atmosphere do you think it was? It's your theory, you should get a little specific if you want to support it. edited to add: just to add something that you may not know. Liquid water is dense, its more dense than air. Stuff that's more dense than air does not float on it. Throw some water into the air, notice how it falls, then think how this would apply to your canopy theory. This message has been edited by DrJones*, 01-21-2005 04:06 AM *not an actual doctor
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
DrJones* Member Posts: 2290 From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 7.6 |
What about the sperconducting, carbon rich, stuff? What superconducting, carbon rich stuff? What is the chemical composition of this stuff? how much of it is in your fictional canopy? Like I said before please supply some support for your arguements. *not an actual doctor
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
DrJones* Member Posts: 2290 From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 7.6 |
If the extrapolations you mentioned that explain the stuff below that are very wrong How could the extraploations be wrong? What factors would cause this supposed error? Please supply the evidence that would suggest that these extrapolations are wrong. Do you know what an extrapolation is? *not an actual doctor
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
DrJones* Member Posts: 2290 From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 7.6 |
So, besides some heat down there, which was already talked about, what you got? No, its your turn to explain why these extrapolations could be wrong. You're saying that the current knowledge of geology is flawed, you have to support this. What evidence do you have that these extrapolations are wrong? edited to add: per Nosey's suggestion below
from Inside the Earth - Enchanted Learning edited again: read Nosey's link below for the evidence. This message has been edited by DrJones*, 01-21-2005 21:59 AM This message has been edited by DrJones*, 01-21-2005 22:01 AM *not an actual doctor
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
DrJones* Member Posts: 2290 From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 7.6 |
I gave a possible cause already to where heat in the top area of the crust would be a result of this hydroplate sliding. and what evidence do you have for this? *not an actual doctor
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
DrJones* Member Posts: 2290 From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 7.6 |
The hot water was continually erupting the heated waters above the earth's atmosphere. So No, it would not be frying the inhabitants in the ark. Your wording is weird but you seem to be saying that the plumes of steam started at the ocean floor and ended outside the Earth's atmosphere, is this a correct interpretation? If it is then you and Walt are still wrong.
There is no way to ensure that the only time the steam plume loses heat is when it escapes the atmosphere. It will lose heat during the entire distance it travels, Noah will Die. This message has been edited by DrJones*, 01-22-2005 15:26 AM *not an actual doctor
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
DrJones* Member Posts: 2290 From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 7.6 |
You're missing the point. As the steam travels up from the ocean floor it will heat the ocean and the atmosphere that it passes through. On it's way back down it follows the scenario JonF describes. The Earth is heated by the steam during both it's up and down voyages. Noah fries.
*not an actual doctor
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
DrJones* Member Posts: 2290 From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 7.6 |
I see the waters erupting upward would of rolled back the oceans even with the fictional rolling back of the oceans the steam would still have to pass through the atmosphere on its way up. The atmosphere wuld still be heated by the steam on the way up.
JonF is saying the water would be returning so fast without any atmosphere would become super heated. No he's not. What he's saying is simple physics. The water outside of the atmosphere, due to its altitude, has potential energy. As the water falls back to earth, this potential energy is converted to kinetic energy. This kinetic energy is then converted into heat (due to air friction) as the water passes through the atmosphere and it is also converted into heat once the water impacts the earth. As I said before the Earth is heated by the steam going up and coming down. Noah fries.
I agree though that the steam allowed the waters to well upwards as it cooled. What do you mean you agree? I've never stated this. Who are you agreeing with? This message has been edited by DrJones*, 01-22-2005 17:56 AM *not an actual doctor
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
DrJones* Member Posts: 2290 From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 7.6 |
DrJones, One last spin, the bible says the atmosphere was rolled back, it says the windows of heaven were opened. Given the atmosphere is rolled back it wouldn't be any atmosphere to be heated on its way up. Well if you're going to rely on magic just say so instead of pretending that there is some scientific explanation. Could you explain how Noah and the animals lived with no air to breath?
Were talking about water just welled up above the atmosphere, don't see this as a problem. What do you mean "welled up above the atmosphere"? If its above the atmosphere it's going to gain alot of speed on the way down. Do you not understand simple physics? edited to add:
I took it that JonF is saying rain fell our of orbit it would pick up such speed that when it hit the atmosphere it would generate heat When one moving object collides with another object heat is always generated, no matter what speed the first object is moving at. Take a hammer and pound on a piece of metal for a while, both the hammer and the metal will get hotter. Once more its simple high school physics. This message has been edited by DrJones*, 01-22-2005 18:17 AM This message has been edited by DrJones*, 01-22-2005 18:17 AM *not an actual doctor
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
DrJones* Member Posts: 2290 From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 7.6 |
DrJones, Got to spin on out of here, the window of heaven (atmosphere) was opened by the super steamed water pressing it aside. For the steam to press aside the atmosphere it would have to touch the atmosphere and it would have to be in contact for the whole time the steam was spewing upwards. With contact you get heat transfer. The steam will lose heat to the atmosphere. Noah fries.
Noah had greater air pressure with all air being displaced and all this water pressing downward on the atmosphere How did Noah survive this increased air pressure? This message has been edited by DrJones*, 01-22-2005 18:25 AM *not an actual doctor
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024