Scienthuse
Posts: 43
Joined: Sep. 2009
|
| Quote (Doc Bill @ Oct. 14 2009,22:52) | Hey, SciMoron, how's the water going?
Every creationist I've cornered with this question about water has run to Mama because he/she can't do the math.
Poor baby.
So, where did the water come from and where did it go?
Also, you've got a time problem. You've got to get to 30,000 feet in 40 days. That's roughly 1000 feet per day of rain.
Slowly? You can't go slowly and flood the earth, moron. Srsly, does it hurt being stupid? |
I take it since we are talking about the flood, we can use just a bit of scripture--just this one.
Genesis 7:11, 12 -- In the six hundredth year of Noah’s life, on the seventeenth day of the second month—on that day all the springs of the great deep burst forth, and the floodgates of the heavens were opened. 12 And rain fell on the earth forty days and forty nights.
First, Doc Bill, don't be fooled by the simplicity of the narrative--it is speaking to people of all generations--what makes us think our scientific culture is so special? The arrogant scorn of these last generations at texts that were here long before we were ever thought of amazes some people.
Second, we don't know if the water level was 30,000 feet--that's based on today's figures. We don't know ocean levels or how much tectonic movement has occurred in orogeny since then. By the figure you mentioned you're referring to the narrative saying the water went above the mountains.
Third, in reference to other comments--no one here can do any math without variables--and no one has them--because it is in the past. Please don't start with math since evolutionists are notorious at turning a deaf ear to the improbability of unguided mutation as a mechanism for macroevolution.
Fourth, there were obviously two major water sources and a third may be considered. Hard rain by the metaphor "floodgates," and the "springs (or fountains) of the great deep" being the second. This could refer to oceanic and/or subterranean origin of the waters.
The third could be only considered--it seems that the water "bursting forth" or being "broken up" in other translations--KJV (NIV is a modern accurate translation--not a paraphrase but not quite as literal as KJV) could imply (inductively only) tectonics. And many creationists include this possibility throughout the deluge--not only during the rain, but during the drainage period.
Fifth, Where did it go? I'm not an expert on creationist theories but the general gist is that tectonic uplift would have been involved here. Baumgardner did a computer model for his PhD--I couldn't find it. I'll look for it. The model is one of the Atlantic ocean during the deluge. It's not just a video. He seems to be quite advanced in his knowledge of computers.
Sixth, can you let me ask a question.
This is off the subject of the flood. During the formation of the earth why did the rocks and asteroids in open space defy Newton's third law?
If I take a bat and hit a ball it rebounds from the bat in reaction--I understand we are talking about very large objects. i understand this is based on Einstein's theory--gravitational attraction pulls the objects together. But meteorites come to us from our asteroid belt regularly as a result of collisions. Newton's third law is empirical in nature and in space.
No.1 This VIDEO does not teach that they were pulled gently into each other, they were "violent" collisions.
No2. Either way--gentle or violent--I tend to think Newton's law is going to work. They are going to bounce off of each other--otherwise why should we ever have to worry about any asteroids from our asteroid belt? I realize that other asteroids come in from other places--but some of them come from the AB--some of them no doubt resulting from collisions.
|
