|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 5939 days) Posts: 3435 From: Edmonton Alberta Canada Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Source of biblical flood water? | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Dead Parrot Member (Idle past 3376 days) Posts: 151 From: Wellington, NZ Joined: |
which seems to indicate a solid object Not to me, it indicates a sky. An idle thought - What was the Hebrew word used? I ask merely because in the Chaldean cosmology, the waters that were divided into heaven and Earth were seperated by a layer of tin... http://www.faqs.org/faqs/mythology/sumer-faq/
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Dead Parrot Member (Idle past 3376 days) Posts: 151 From: Wellington, NZ Joined: |
firmament/ expanse. used to describe solid objects. from raqa meaning "to stamp out" (as you would with metal) Well there's a thing. At least it explains what happened to Beagle 2...
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Dead Parrot Member (Idle past 3376 days) Posts: 151 From: Wellington, NZ Joined: |
silly literal metal bit is shown to be a minor opinion, actually I never read one commentary where anyone refered to it in any other way than saying, "as" or "like" hammering out metal How hard did you look? http://www.headcoverings-by-devorah.com/TorahCommentary.html"Rashi comments: "This means, let the sky (firmament) become hardened." http://www.asa3.org/...pics/Bible-Science/PSCF6-97Seely.htmlAs to the solidity of the firmament, the historical context is that all peoples in all parts of the world including the ancient Near East, from the beginning of history until 200 A.D. (and almost all peoples after that until modern times) believed that the sky, the firmament, was rock-solid; they distinguished this rock-solid firmament from the atmosphere. The burden of proof lies on anyone saying that the Hebrews did not do the same. (Emph. mine) You may also want to look at IBSS - The Bible - Genesis 1 and scroll down to "Creation of the Firmament"
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Dead Parrot Member (Idle past 3376 days) Posts: 151 From: Wellington, NZ Joined: |
why is it so hard to convince people that the bible actually represents the opinions and worldviews of the people who wrote it? It's that whacky fundamental inerrancy. The Bible has to be 100% accurate: If it's demonstably self conflicting (like Jesus' infamous last words) or demonstably wrong (like the bat-birds in Lev.) then it's a 100% accurate metaphor. That bits of it might just, conceivably, been written 4500 years ago by desert nomads who'd never been more than 6 feet from ground level isn't a viable option. This message has been edited by Dead Parrot, 04-20-2005 03:00 AM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Dead Parrot Member (Idle past 3376 days) Posts: 151 From: Wellington, NZ Joined: |
...written 4500 years ago by desert nomads... actually, now THAT i doubt. the oldest bits of the bible we have seem to be well after establishment of the divided kingdom. genesis seems to have been compiled from traditions (including multiple babylonian sources) around 600 bc, under captivity. this date actually satisfies a lot of biblical texts, including most of the major prophets. deuteronomy appears to have been forged before exile, but well after exodus Yes, I didn't make myself very clear - I meant the the original legends Gen. is based on. I'm not going to get into the Chaldean-older-or-younger debate (that way lies madness) but I'm assuming they both (ahem) evolved from a common earlier creation myth. The idea of seperating the primeval waters, making clay out of men etc. seems fairly universal. As an aside, if the writers did not mean the sky was solid, how do you fit windows to it? (Gen 7-11. Everyday convenience for creators on the go.) Edit: I did mean to say making men out of clay, but I think I prefer my version. This message has been edited by Dead Parrot, 04-20-2005 03:47 AM Mat 27:5 And he went and hanged himself Luk 10:37 Go, and do thou likewise.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Dead Parrot Member (Idle past 3376 days) Posts: 151 From: Wellington, NZ Joined: |
Interesting commentary - where's it from?
They've got a few bits backwards: The electric spark, which is the same as lightning, passing through these airs, decomposes them and converts them to water Applying electricy to water will break it up into the hydrogen and oxygen, not vice versa.
And to this cause we may probably attribute the rain which immediately follows the flash of lightning and peal of thunder Only if we skipped fourth grade. Alternativley, we could attribute it to (in plain english) the noise of the thunder knocking the drops of vapour together. This sounds like a version of the vapour canopy idea, which renders the pre-flood Earth looking a lot like venus does now - huge pressures and temperatures. Nice to see someone's still trying to make it work. I'd stick to the people who use "G-d", if I were you. Mat 27:5 And he went and hanged himself Luk 10:37 Go, and do thou likewise.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Dead Parrot Member (Idle past 3376 days) Posts: 151 From: Wellington, NZ Joined: |
Maybe the writers meant that the electricy when applied to the gasses ("airs") would produce the water, Yes, that's what they said. It's still backwards.
Let us look at the pre flood world, where, by some accounts, there was a lot more oxygen Do they say how much? Oxygen is toxic at high levels (above 25%, I think, for humans: ) The air is currently 20%, so there's not much room to play with, and I'm not sure how much I'd want floating around at ground level. And the hydrogen would be on top: Off into space in fact, which is why there is almost none in our atmosphere ( 0.0005%) although if the Earth was freshly made with a load of hydrogen in the atmosphere only a few thousand years previously, I'll accept that it wouldn't have time to do so. I doubt we'd need fire suppressant in the air, the hydrogen would be watered (ahem) down by the nitrogen. A quick scratching out:We could add 5% of the mass of the atmosphere in oxygen before we die: 5% of Earths atmosphere = 2.5x10e17 kg We can ignore the hydrogen, it's too light to make much difference, so we get the same(ish) mass of water if it's converted to water. Mass of the oceans = 1.4x10e24 kg, so we'd only get0.000001% of the current oceans from this method. But I guess it's a start. This message has been edited by Dead Parrot, 04-20-2005 10:09 PM Mat 27:5 And he went and hanged himself Luk 10:37 Go, and do thou likewise.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Dead Parrot Member (Idle past 3376 days) Posts: 151 From: Wellington, NZ Joined: |
Mass of the oceans = 1.4x10e24 kg, so we'd only get 0.000001% of the current oceans from this method. But I guess it's a start. but what if there were no mountains and the earth was all flat! lol. Some sort of waders might be in order... Mat 27:5 And he went and hanged himself Luk 10:37 Go, and do thou likewise.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Dead Parrot Member (Idle past 3376 days) Posts: 151 From: Wellington, NZ Joined: |
So where do we look for this, in the ocean? Say, the Juan de Fuca plate? What is it we will see exactly that proves that it moved only slowly? Off topic, but the idea of rapid continental shift is interesting enough to come up with more idle scratchings... Lets say the continents moved while the earth was flooded (150 days) and restrict ourself to north and south America: Area of plates = 119,505,000 km2Average thickness around 150 km, so about 18,000,000,000,000,000,000 m3 of (mostly) granite density of granite is around 2,600 kg/m3, so 46,800,000,000,000,000,000,000 kg of rock To cover 5,000,000 metres (the approx distance) in 150 days, requires acceleration/deceleration of 0.77 metres per second per second: The power required is therefore 36.1 zettawatts I had to look up zettawatt. It's the amount of energy you get from a small star, and I wouldn't fancy being near 36 of them in a boat... Mat 27:5 And he went and hanged himself Luk 10:37 Go, and do thou likewise.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Dead Parrot Member (Idle past 3376 days) Posts: 151 From: Wellington, NZ Joined: |
Which bit in the bible says this? i dunno. maybe it was the same place he got the ropes bit:
quote: Reminds me of "Dogma":"I am the Metatron... Don't tell me the name doesn't ring a bell. You people, If there isn't a movie about it, it's not worth knowing, right?"
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Dead Parrot Member (Idle past 3376 days) Posts: 151 From: Wellington, NZ Joined: |
Well lets take some different numbers here for a spin. Be happy to!
Walty, I believe, had it at 25 km (or was it miles?) deep, for a plate. I'm going by a USGS factsheet , which says:"Plate thickness also varies greatly, ranging from less than 15 km for young oceanic lithosphere to about 200 km or more for ancient continental lithosphere (for example, the interior parts of North and South America)." I thought 150km was being quite generous. Now the 5,000,000 meters is the aprox distance of what?
Thats the width of the Atlantic, from Africa to S. America - The distance the plates have moved.
I was thinking of using as little movement as possible here.(Not Brown's total continental slide, from ridge out to present location) Lets say, the plates then, in America only moved (with water under there to take out the friction) about 100 miles! Fair enough, but that's how far they've moved. We would then have to explain how the ocean got to be over 3,100 miles wide in the subsequent centuries without anyone notice a continent scuttling off over the horizon. (The movement at present has been meaused at about inch per year.) I didn't add any friction into my sums.
Even with a nice short route now, and a much thinner pancake than the one you envisioned we still get a lot of heat. The figure I was working out was how much energy you'd have to put into the plates to get them moving that quickly.
The 64 dollar question is, how much exactly? Look at the recent tsnami in asia. Some plate movement, what was it 50, 60 feet or so? Now, I would expect that to generate some heat. The energy has been building up (as stress in the rock) for years, so it's not generating heat per se. Counting on my fingers, the 2004 tsunami was about 0.00000001% of the amount of energy I've guesstimated. You seriously wouldn't want to be on the same planet.
What did we see just last week or so? Volcanic activity right nearby! The ring of fire is very active - always has been. Earthquakes are a daily occurance here (New Zealand) but we're lucky enough to get lots of little ones, rather than occasional big ones. (Having said that, I haven't felt one for over a week now...) Now that the plates have rearranged, it'll be a couple of years till it settles down again
The flood was a lot more violent, and with grater tectonic violence, we'd have a lot more volcanic activity, and magma etc. You're not kidding... Mat 27:5 And he went and hanged himself Luk 10:37 Go, and do thou likewise.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Dead Parrot Member (Idle past 3376 days) Posts: 151 From: Wellington, NZ Joined: |
Nitpicking: the energy released by the tsunami earthquake did wind up as heat, but wasn't very noticable because it got spread out pretty widely in a medium with high thermal conductivity. Consider that nit well and truly picked... Mat 27:5 And he went and hanged himself Luk 10:37 Go, and do thou likewise.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Dead Parrot Member (Idle past 3376 days) Posts: 151 From: Wellington, NZ Joined: |
quote:Right, apparently. But say that was wrong... Ahh, an evil conspiricy of athesist cartographers? Could be... Although I flew over it last year, and certainly looked big.
Well, see, I think the thing is, that he had water down there not too far, and the 'plates' then on top of the water were not as now, but thin. Why? I think because it was the stuff on top only that was moved. So we need to look at a thinner pancake pre flood here. Without the water now, why naturally all our seismic waves will 'see' down there is rock. OK so say a 20 mile thick pancake plate So, move just 20,000,000,000, trillion tons of rock, that have been floating like a cork up till then? Try an experiment:1)go to the beach 2)throw a rock in the ocean 3)time how long it floats. If it's more than a thousand years, I'll accept it as a possible. Maybe not with the plate tectonic theory. But we seem to have some heat there, with the volcanic activity. The heat in the earth is from radioactive decay - it drives tectonic activity, not vice versa. Mat 27:5 And he went and hanged himself Luk 10:37 Go, and do thou likewise.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Dead Parrot Member (Idle past 3376 days) Posts: 151 From: Wellington, NZ Joined: |
In other words, how much heat would the thin pancake plate moving 100 miles on a lot of water generate? (Deep breath)I was talking about the amount of energy you would need to put into something the size of a large tectonic plate to make it move any any noticable speed. As an aside, why would a supreme being but a continent on legs? Although, after the platypus, I'm prepared to admit He may have sampled some of his finer mushrooms. Mat 27:5 And he went and hanged himself Luk 10:37 Go, and do thou likewise.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Dead Parrot Member (Idle past 3376 days) Posts: 151 From: Wellington, NZ Joined: |
The heat in the earth is from radioactive decay - it drives tectonic activity, not vice versa. depends. it sort of works in a cycle. the convection currents in the mantle push some magma up, which spreads the plates. the subducted plates on the other end help drive the mantle. and boundaries do create heat, which becomes volcanic activity/ earthquakes. Well I was trying to keep things simple. But we've now got onto continents on legs. I wish I'd listened to my mother more often... Mat 27:5 And he went and hanged himself Luk 10:37 Go, and do thou likewise.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024