Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 50 (9179 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: Jorge Parker
Post Volume: Total: 918,207 Year: 5,464/9,624 Month: 489/323 Week: 129/204 Day: 3/26 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Solving the Mystery of the Biblical Flood II
Randy
Member (Idle past 6360 days)
Posts: 420
From: Cincinnati OH USA
Joined: 07-19-2002


Message 92 of 234 (29229)
01-15-2003 9:35 PM
Reply to: Message 91 by Tranquility Base
01-15-2003 6:43 PM


quote:
Mt St Helens demonstrated on an intermediate scale how solid rock can be carved out catastrophically.
Yes solid rock can be destroyed catastrophically by a massive volcanic blast but what you are implying is false. The ground that was "carved" at St. Helens was partially consolidated deposits from countless previous eruptions of the mountain over the last 20,000 years and soft volcanic mud that flowed as a lahar. Much of the "carving" of previous deposits was done by the largest landslide in recorded history combined with a massive lateral blast not a flood. If you walk out on the mountain as I have done twice since the eruption you can dig up the "solid rock" you are talking about with your bare hands as I think I told you before. The so called little grand canyon on the Toutle river was cut through volcanic ash deposits by mud flows. It is the same material that still occasionally flows in lahars down Mt. Pinatubo wiping out villages and was hardly solid rock. I think you will find that a lot of the so called solid rock has now been transported down the river and had to be dredged out of the Cowlitz and Lewis river basins.
You might try to learn what really happened at St. Helens and not believe the distortions produced by professional creationists.
Randy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 91 by Tranquility Base, posted 01-15-2003 6:43 PM Tranquility Base has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 93 by edge, posted 01-16-2003 1:12 AM Randy has not replied

  
Randy
Member (Idle past 6360 days)
Posts: 420
From: Cincinnati OH USA
Joined: 07-19-2002


Message 155 of 234 (34446)
03-15-2003 6:45 AM
Reply to: Message 154 by Buzsaw
03-14-2003 11:46 PM


cooking with vapor canopies
quote:
I just found this forum today and don't know what all's been covered, but here's my take on the preflood and postflood surface of the earth.
1. Before the flood the majority of our ocean waters were in the atmosphere providing a protective terrarium canopy over the earth.
The vapor canopy hypothesis was discredited long ago. It is not possible to have a majority of the water now in the oceans in the atmosphere without cooking the earth to death. To get even a few hundred meters of global rain from a small fraction of the waters in the ocean requires an atmosphere of saturated steam.
There is estimated to be enough water in the atmosphere to produce about 1 inch of global rain ( about 1.3 10^16 kg). There are about 1.4 billion cubic kilometers of water in the oceans, weighing about 1.4 x 10^21 kg. Thus there is 10,000 times more water in the oceans than in the air. Air at 100 F and 100% RH holds about 50 g water per cubic meter so the only way to put a majority of the water in the oceans into the atmosphere is to have an atmosphere of saturated steam. Atmospheric pressure is hydrostatic so the pressure will be very high. Using my steam tables, the amount of water in the oceans and the area of the earth, I calculate that to have 51% of the water now in the oceans in the air would require an atmosphere 100 km deep, saturated with steam at a temperature of 392 F with a pressure of about 135 atmospheres. This doesn’t sound protective to me though it would certainly protect against the existence of life.
The rest of your take also has serious problems but since you start off with impossibility I don’t feel the need to address them now. Maybe others will.
PS: This thread has been to discuss a specific flood model by Wm Scott. If you want to address your ideas you might want to start another thread. You might want to do a little research first and not present things like the vapor canopy that even most creationist organizations have long abandoned.
Randy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 154 by Buzsaw, posted 03-14-2003 11:46 PM Buzsaw has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024