Isn't it reasonable to doubt Young Earth Creationism?

[iouae]

That's nice.

Now try the experiment in the manner I suggested. :up:

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

What did you suggest

But jeje vu tells me we are going to play 20 questions with you doing the ninja stealth thing of dodging a useful answer.

 

[iouae]

You mistake interpretations supporting secular beliefs for science. What you mistakenly think is "real science" is not real truth. Real truth is God's Word.


Everything evolutionists once declared about Neandertals has been proven wrong by science. Science has revealed the humanity of Neandertals... much to the disappointment of those who reject the Creator God of Scripture.

So when did Neanderthals die out?

 

[iouae]

Your God may think death is nice. The God of the Bible says death entered our world as a consequence of sin. God calls death the final enemy... which Jesus conquered. Your God is Baal-like...an idol you create.

Most of the fossils are just laying there and not eating anything. But... since the fossils were mostly formed about 1,500 years after sin entered our world, there were many carnivores by then.

A wonderful bit of circular reasoning you have going there.

Before things were "fallen" they did not eat meat and they did not die so they could never be fossilised, and that folks is why we never find a stratum with an un-fallen biome of just plants and herbivores, no carnivores.

Meanwhile, back in reality, nowhere in the geologic column is there a stratum sans carnivores.

 

[JudgeRightly]

So when did Neanderthals die out?

In the Global Flood, duh.

 

[iouae]

Your God may think death is nice. The God of the Bible says death entered our world as a consequence of sin. God calls death the final enemy... which Jesus conquered. Your God is Baal-like...an idol you create.

Most of the fossils are just laying there and not eating anything. But... since the fossils were mostly formed about 1,500 years after sin entered our world, there were many carnivores by then.

Could animals eat of the Tree of Life?

And remember, the Tree of Life was only in Eden, and Eden was a little garden in a big world.

So all animals outside Eden were going to die, because even Adam and Eve had to eat of the Tree of Life in order to live forever.

It would be nice for once to get a straight answer from you as to how animals outside Eden were expected to live forever.

 

[JudgeRightly]

A wonderful bit of circular reasoning you have going there.

Before things were "fallen" they did not eat meat and they did not die so they could never be fossilised, and that folks is why we never find a stratum with an un-fallen biome of just plants and herbivores, no carnivores.

Meanwhile, back in reality, nowhere in the geologic column is there a stratum sans carnivores.

Please stop with this utterly ridiculous strawman.

The fall happened in Genesis 3. ~1600 years later, in Genesis 7, is when the Flood happened.

Plenty of time for creatures to adapt to a new diet.

 

[Stripe]

What did you suggest.

Try reading. :up:

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

 

[6days]

So when did Neanderthals die out?

They didn't. We are their descendants. Although... yes, the the distinct people group known as Neandertals no longer exists.


From God's Word..... and from science showing the the humanity of Neandertals, we know these people are descendants of Adam and Eve. [MENTION=4108]Judge Rightly[/MENTION] thinks they perished in the flood. We can't be certain, but I think they died out in the post flood Ice Age or shortly thereafter. (There may be no pre-flood human fossils. Gen. 6:7)

Could animals eat of the Tree of Life?

Possibly, but the Bible does not tell us if they could eat of this tree. God's instructions about the tree was to humans only. Animals did not have a test of obedience, as did Adam and Eve.

So all animals outside Eden were going to die, because even Adam and Eve had to eat of the Tree of Life in order to live forever.

Thorns, pain, sufferring and death (entropy) entered the world, as a consequence of man's sin. It is only a compromise with secular beliefs that anyone would think a corrupted creation existed outside of Eden.

It would seem that the tree of life was an eventual reward for obedience. God, in Love, prevented sinful man from living forever as fallen creatures, without hope of redemption.

It would be nice for once to get a straight answer from you as to how animals outside Eden were expected to live forever.

You don't want straight answers iouae. What you want is secularirized answers. God's Word does not tell us what would have happened had man not sinned. God however knew people would reject Him, and that creation would be cursed.

 

[iouae]

JR the site seems to have lost your post, so I will respond from memory.

You see no problem with a mile deep of supercritical water being emitted from earth at mach 151. That is 1 mile deep, 60 miles under the surface of the whole earth.

All this water equal to 1 mile of earth's surface all blowing out of crevasses at mach 151.

And you ask me to explain how this would destroy all life on earth.

If your hydroplate buddy had a real science degree, not one from the university of Mom and Pop, he would have known and explained why this would instantly kill almost all but bacteria on earth.

Here is the size of what scientists call doomsday or killer meteors...
"
In what could be a major scientific puzzle, the team's new size estimate for the dino-killing meteorite is a mere 2.5 to 3.7 miles (4 to 6 kilometers) across.

The most recent computer models predicted a size of 9 to 12 miles (15 to 19 kilometers) across."
https://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2008/04/080410-sea-meteorites.html

So a lump of rock a mere 3 to 12 miles across was able to wipe out the dinosaurs so that none survived.
And these rocks travel at about mach 70.

Yet this pinprick sized rock can cause a mass extinction because of its velocity.

What you and your hydroplate buddy propose is a reverse of a meteor striking earth. Same energy principle.

Except you and your buddy have an earth sized sphere 1 mile deep of water travelling at mach 151 bursting from earths surface.

I don't want to do the maths but this volume of water is millions of times bigger than the mere 12 mile meteor, and twice the speed. The energies are incomprehensibly large. That means it would do billions of times more damage to earth than the dino-killing meteor. No wooden boat, covered with bitumen could survive this. No cockroach could survive this. If you and you buddy cannot comprehend this amount of energy, well, at least I tried.

You also asked why the mach 5 water jet does not disperse. It does! That's why they put the steel close to the nozzle.

And once water leaves extreme pressure and heat it instantly is no longer supercritical. So all the magical properties disappear.

 

[JudgeRightly]

JR the site seems to have lost your post, so I will respond from memory.

You see no problem with a mile deep of supercritical water being emitted from earth at mach 151. That is 1 mile deep, 60 miles under the surface of the whole earth.

All this water equal to 1 mile of earth's surface all blowing out of crevasses at mach 151.

And you ask me to explain how this would destroy all life on earth.

Yes, I want at least a general explanation. "This would destroy all life on earth" just doesn't cut it.

If your hydroplate buddy had a real science degree, not one from the university of Mom and Pop,

Hey everyone, according to iouae, West Point and MIT are "Mom and Pop" universities... :mock: :mock: :mock:

he would have known and explained why this would instantly kill almost all but bacteria on earth.

He explains why it WOULDN'T kill all life on earth. But you're too lazy to read why.

Here is the size of what scientists call doomsday or killer meteors...

"In what could be a major scientific puzzle, the team's new size estimate for the dino-killing meteorite is a mere 2.5 to 3.7 miles (4 to 6 kilometers) across.

So, there were dino-killing asteroids in God's perfect, "very good" creation... At least according to you. Whereas the Hydroplate Theory explains the origins of asteroids as the Global Flood, meaning asteroids and meteors and comets and other "space debris" all come from Earth.

The most recent computer models predicted a size of 9 to 12 miles (15 to 19 kilometers) across."
https://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2008/04/080410-sea-meteorites.html

So a lump of rock a mere 3 to 12 miles across was able to wipe out the dinosaurs so that none survived.
And these rocks travel at about mach 70.

Yet this pinprick sized rock can cause a mass extinction because of its velocity.

:blabla:

All moot, because asteroids didn't exist prior to the Global Flood, which is where we get all the fossils anyways.

What you and your hydroplate buddy propose is a reverse of a meteor striking earth. Same energy principle.

Nope.

An explosion that occurs and forces everything directly upwards at speeds of at least mach 151 forces everything upwards for a long distance before it starts

Except you and your buddy have an earth sized sphere 1 mile deep of water travelling at mach 151 bursting from earths surface.

Not "water." "Supercritical water."

Get it right.

I don't want to do the maths but this volume of water is millions of times bigger than the mere 12 mile meteor, and twice the speed. The energies are incomprehensibly large. That means it would do billions of times more damage to earth than the dino-killing meteor.

Not only did it form a baseball-stitches like crack in the earth, not only did the resulting erosion of the cliffs increase the distance between today's continents, not only did the resulting gap relieve pressure on the layer of rock under the hydroplates, which pushed up due to a lack of pressure, which caused the continents to start sliding on a near perfect lubricant, but the earth also rolled nearly 60 degrees because of it over several weeks. Which explains why "wooly mammoths" have tropical plants in their bellies up near the arctic circle.

If that didn't blow your mind, I don't know what will.

No wooden boat, covered with bitumen could survive this. No cockroach could survive this. If you and you buddy cannot comprehend this amount of energy, well, at least I tried.

You keep forgetting one very crucial thing:

Velocity is the speed of something in a given direction. The velocity of of the FotGD was mach 151... STRAIGHT UP!!!!

The only thing it would destroy would be it eroding away the 60 mile cliff face.

 

[iouae]

Yes, I want at least a general explanation. "This would destroy all life on earth" just doesn't cut it.



Hey everyone, according to iouae, West Point and MIT are "Mom and Pop" universities... :mock: :mock: :mock:



He explains why it WOULDN'T kill all life on earth. But you're too lazy to read why.



So, there were dino-killing asteroids in God's perfect, "very good" creation... At least according to you. Whereas the Hydroplate Theory explains the origins of asteroids as the Global Flood, meaning asteroids and meteors and comets and other "space debris" all come from Earth.



:blabla:

All moot, because asteroids didn't exist prior to the Global Flood, which is where we get all the fossils anyways.



Nope.

An explosion that occurs and forces everything directly upwards at speeds of at least mach 151 forces everything upwards for a long distance before it starts



Not "water." "Supercritical water."

Get it right.



Not only did it form a baseball-stitches like crack in the earth, not only did the resulting erosion of the cliffs increase the distance between today's continents, not only did the resulting gap relieve pressure on the layer of rock under the hydroplates, which pushed up due to a lack of pressure, which caused the continents to start sliding on a near perfect lubricant, but the earth also rolled nearly 60 degrees because of it over several weeks. Which explains why "wooly mammoths" have tropical plants in their bellies up near the arctic circle.

If that didn't blow your mind, I don't know what will.



You keep forgetting one very crucial thing:

Velocity is the speed of something in a given direction. The velocity of of the FotGD was mach 151... STRAIGHT UP!!!!

The only thing it would destroy would be it eroding away the 60 mile cliff face.

You do know that scientists monitor space for earth killing asteroids/meteors heading towards earth.

These don't have to be big to wipe all mankind out - just a few miles across.

And you do know that whether its something shooting out from earth, or shooting into earth, the energy calculations are the same.

What you are proposing is matter equal to the following sized meteor hitting the earth....

volume of a sphere = V=4/3πr3 where r = radius of earth or 3,963 miles minus 60 (since water is 60 miles deep) or 4/3 x π x 3903 x 3903 x 3903 cubic miles

= 2.490 x 10 raised to the power of 11 cubic miles.

But you say it is only 1 mile thick of water, so we subtract from this, a sphere 1 mile less in radius than the first sphere.

Inner sphere = 4/3 x π x 3902 x 3902 x 3902 cubic miles or 2.488 x 10 raised to the power of 11


Subtracting the two, we have a meteor with a volume of 142688779 cubic miles.

It is this volume of water you say is rushing upwards at mach 151.

Meanwhile, a 12 mile across meteor with radius 6 miles is earth destroying.

This has volume 4/3 x π x 6 x 6 x 6 cubic miles

= 904.7 cubic miles

Divide this volume into 142688779 cubic miles of water = 157705

Thus your hydroplate water let us say traveling at ONLY mach 70 (the speed of a meteor) would destroy the earth 157705 times over.

But if your water is travelling at twice that speed, its devastation would not be twice as much but exponentially more.

 

[6days]

I view the world as the beautiful, magnificent epitome of the creative powers of God. Its a wonderful creation.

It sure is a wonderful creation. But ask now the beasts, and they shall teach thee; and the fowls of the air, and they shall tell thee: Or speak to the earth, and it shall teach thee: and the fishes of the sea shall declare unto thee. Who knoweth not in all these that the hand of the LORD hath wrought this? Job 12

And physics, chemistry, biology, astronomy etc. - the sciences which every day tell us more of its marvels, are telling us every day how marvellous God is.

We agree. Science helps confirm the truth of God's Word. Studying His creation, can be a form of worship.

How sad that all you can see is a cursed world.

That's a wee bit of a dishonest strawman.


We live in a beautiful creation, but we do suffer from effects of the curse. We have sickness, pain, extinctions, thorns and death. As God's Word tells us, "all creation groans".


We look forward to the time when we no longer live under the effects of the curse. Be knows our future. God tells us that a time is coming when we no longer live under the curse... 'There will be no more pain, suffering and death and He will wipe every tear from our eyes'. Rev.21:4

 

[JudgeRightly]

You do know that scientists monitor space for earth killing asteroids/meteors heading towards earth.

Of course I do. That wasn't my argument though. I said that asteroids did exist prior to the Global Flood.

These don't have to be big to wipe all mankind out - just a few miles across.

And you do know that whether its something shooting out from earth, or shooting into earth, the energy calculations are the same.

SCW and rock traveling at mach 151 isn't just going to go 90 degrees to the path it's traveling just because you say so.

What you are proposing is matter equal to the following sized meteor hitting the earth....

volume of a sphere = V=4/3πr3 where r = radius of earth or 3,963 miles minus 60 (since water is 60 miles deep) or 4/3 x π x 3903 x 3903 x 3903 cubic miles

= 2.490 x 10 raised to the power of 11 cubic miles.

But you say it is only 1 mile thick of water, so we subtract from this, a sphere 1 mile less in radius than the first sphere.

Inner sphere = 4/3 x π x 3902 x 3902 x 3902 cubic miles or 2.488 x 10 raised to the power of 11


Subtracting the two, we have a meteor with a volume of 142688779 cubic miles.

It is this volume of water you say is rushing upwards at mach 151.

Yes, exactly. UPWARDS! NOT TO THE SIDE!

Meanwhile, a 12 mile across meteor with radius 6 miles is earth destroying.

This has volume 4/3 x π x 6 x 6 x 6 cubic miles

= 904.7 cubic miles

Divide this volume into 142688779 cubic miles of water = 157705

Thus your hydroplate water let us say traveling at ONLY mach 70 (the speed of a meteor) would destroy the earth 157705 times over.

If it were traveling directly at the earth, and hit the earth and spread out, yeah, it would be devastating.

The problem is, and I've told you now for the umpteenth time, the water is traveling DIRECTLY UPWARDS!

But if your water is travelling at twice that speed, its devastation would not be twice as much but exponentially more.

Traveling..... DIRECTLY UPWARDS!

 

[CabinetMaker]

Supercritical water under extreme pressure will flash to steam when that pressure is removed. It does not become liquid water. The expansion ratio of water to steam is 1:1600 meaning the steam will attempt occupy 1600 times more volume than the liquid water did. It will try to do so instantly resulting in a huge steam explosion. Since super critical water will flash to steam, what is left to flood the Earth?

 

[JudgeRightly]

Supercritical water under extreme pressure will flash to steam when that pressure is removed. It does not become liquid water. The expansion ratio of water to steam is 1:1600 meaning the steam will attempt occupy 1600 times more volume than the liquid water did. It will try to do so instantly resulting in a huge steam explosion. Since super critical water will flash to steam, what is left to flood the Earth?

When steam cools, it condenses. When it reaches high altitudes quickly, it freezes. If some of it falls back to earth, it warms up and rains.

 

[CabinetMaker]

When steam cools, it condenses. When it reaches high altitudes quickly, it freezes. If some of it falls back to earth, it warms up and rains.

Except it would just drain back into the fountains. They would be rather large and gaping holes due to the steam explosion.

 

[Stripe]

And you do know that whether its something shooting out from earth, or shooting into earth, the energy calculations are the same.

This is stupid beyond belief.

It's like saying a power station will kill everyone because: "Look at all that scary energy."

Vowels, you are an ignorant hack.

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

 

[Stripe]

Supercritical water under extreme pressure will flash to steam when that pressure is removed. It does not become liquid water. The expansion ratio of water to steam is 1:1600 meaning the steam will attempt occupy 1600 times more volume than the liquid water did. It will try to do so instantly resulting in a huge steam explosion. Since super critical water will flash to steam, what is left to flood the Earth?

::rotfl:

I think you're improving, Cabinethead. Only three major misconceptions in this post.

1. SCW is necessarily under pressure.
2. Steam is hot, the fountains were cold.
3. Steam would turn into water and fall to Earth just as water would.

Are the Darwinists determined to be as stupid as possible on mass this morning?

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

 

[CabinetMaker]

::rotfl:

I think you're improving, Cabinethead. Only three major misconceptions in this post.

1. SCW is necessarily under pressure.
2. Steam is hot, the fountains were cold.
3. Steam would turn into water and fall to Earth just as water would.

Are the Darwinists determined to be as stupid as possible on mass this morning?

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

Don't tell me, let me guess. You never studied thermodynamics.

1) Correct
2) Not possible if the water was super critical (Review your termo)
3) Eventually but you are ignoring the steam explosion where 1 cubic mile of water suddenly (And I mean suddenly) becomes 1600 cubic miles of steam. The amount of energy released is staggering.

 

[Stripe]

1) Correct

I know.

2) Not possible

Do you know how a fridge works? Review your thermo. :up:

3) Eventually.

I know.

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk