-
This is a new section being rolled out to attract people interested in exploring the origins of the universe and the earth from a biblical perspective. Debate is encouraged and opposing viewpoints are welcome to post but certain rules must be followed. 1. No abusive tagging - if abusive tags are found - they will be deleted and disabled by the Admin team 2. No calling the biblical accounts a fable - fairy tale ect. This is a Christian site, so members that participate here must be respectful in their disagreement.
Is there any obvious evidence today for the biblical global Flood?
- Thread starter Idolater
- Start date
But not in a manner that is convincing. It isn't mere hand waving but it just isn't plausible and it is an entirely unnecessary component to the overall theory. Indeed, if accepting the notion that Pluto and it's five moons (a system that is wildly complex and which couldn't exist apart from fine tuning (i.e. it was created)) was put into orbit by means of a steam explosion on Earth was a logically necessary component of the theory, I'd reject the entire theory on that basis alone.
Right Divider
Body part
This is probably closer to the events that began the global flood:
Scaling up your initial scenario from 100 billion gallons to 1 quintillion gallons changes the event from a severe regional disaster to a global planetary catastrophe. This volume represents about 0.28% of the total water in modern oceans, or roughly 1.5 times the total volume of the Gulf of Mexico, all compressed into a supercritical state.
If you release 1 quintillion gallons of supercritical water at sea level, the mechanical expansion phase does not stop in minutes. It completely overpowers the local atmosphere, breaches the edge of space, and continues to expand globally for days to weeks.
Scaling up your initial scenario from 100 billion gallons to 1 quintillion gallons changes the event from a severe regional disaster to a global planetary catastrophe. This volume represents about 0.28% of the total water in modern oceans, or roughly 1.5 times the total volume of the Gulf of Mexico, all compressed into a supercritical state.
If you release 1 quintillion gallons of supercritical water at sea level, the mechanical expansion phase does not stop in minutes. It completely overpowers the local atmosphere, breaches the edge of space, and continues to expand globally for days to weeks.
Phase 1: Planetary Shockwave and Hyper-Expansion (0 to 10 Minutes)
The rapid transition from 218+ atmospheres of pressure down to 1 atmosphere causes the water to flash into steam, expanding to over 3,000 times its original compressed volume.- The Mechanism: The atmosphere cannot displace this volume of steam quickly enough. Instead of forming a localized bubble, the steam acts as a solid physical piston, shoving the entire global atmosphere outward.
- The Scale: A supersonic shockwave circles the planet multiple times. Within 10 minutes, the steam cloud expands mechanically to a radius of over 400 kilometers (250 miles). The thermal energy releases a blast wave that shreds the crust at the release point and strips away the surrounding atmosphere.
Phase 2: Trans-Atmospheric Ascent and Orbit (10 Minutes to 2 Hours)
At this volume, you bypass standard convective weather patterns. The steam plume does not just rise into the atmosphere; it blasts right through it.- The Mechanism: The sheer physical height of 1 quintillion gallons of expanding steam easily exceeds the 100-kilometer (62-mile) Karman line. The expanding gas follows a ballistic trajectory into the vacuum of space, where there is no atmospheric pressure to contain it.
- The Scale: Once in the vacuum of space, the steam encounters zero resistance. It continues to expand at hypersonic speeds, wrapping around the curvature of the Earth. Within two hours, a massive, expanding ring of water vapor, ice crystals, and superheated mist encircles the globe in low Earth orbit.
Phase 3: Global Dissipation and Atmospheric Collapse (Hours to Weeks)
The expansion finally stops when the steam runs out of thermal energy and encounters the cold vacuum of space, forcing a change from expansion to dispersion.- The Mechanism: Without an external atmosphere to limit it, the vapor cloud stops expanding only when its internal pressure drops to a vacuum state. Solar radiation and the cold of space then begin to freeze and break down the water molecules.
- The Scale: The global cloud continues to expand outward into space for days. Over weeks, gravity pulls the bulk of the vapor back down into the upper atmosphere. As it cools, it condenses into a planet-wide layer of hyper-dense clouds, triggering torrential, boiling rains globally until the thermal energy radiates away into space.
Expansion Scale Comparison
To see how increasing the volume changes the expansion timeline, you can compare the two scenarios below:| Metric | 100 Billion Gallons | 1 Quintillion Gallon (1,000,000,000 Billion) |
| Mechanical Expansion Time | 12 to 15 seconds | 10 to 30 minutes (Blasts into space) |
| Maximum Cloud Radius | ~6.4 kilometers (4 miles) | Global (Encircled planet and outer space) |
| Total Expansion Duration | ~5 hours (Dissipates regionally) | Weeks (Slowly condenses globally) |
| Primary Limit on Growth | Ambient air pressure at sea level | Earth's gravity and solar radiation in space |
It seems to think that the resulting rain would be "boiling."
Right Divider
Body part
Yes, I didn't really give it all the information required to duplicate what Dr. Brown believes were the starting conditions.
I'm assuming that it's using the ground level event as opposed to the subterranean and funneled situation that we believe was the starting point.
But again, my point (which I think that the output gets correct), is that the expansion of that huge amount of super-critical water would have taken quite a while and was not an instantaneous explosion of all of the energy involved. Clete frequently goes back to that idea (instant or nearly so) and that is where he misses the boat.
In my mind, the expanding super-critical water is practically the ideal type of energy release to propel planetary debris into space.... very immense but gradual enough
Yeah, this wasn't a "crack" (detonation) kind of explosion, like C4 or TNT, where there's lots of initial energy being released all at once. It was a "pusher" (deflagration) kind, like ANFO or a bullet, where the energy release is much more gradual, and transfers energy mechanically to push objects.
No! Not because I say so!
Ever heard of the three-body problem?
Try it with six bodies! The idea that such a system could arise as a result of a steam explosion on a planet some 3 billion plus miles away is NOT PLAUSIBLE!
If Pluto was out there by itself, it still wouldn't be plausible. The fact that it has five moons, all of which are in very stable, nearly perfectly circular orbits in what is, in effect, a binary planetary system, makes it WILDLY complex to the point that it very simply cannot have happened as the result of an explosion that occurred billions of miles away. It would be like blowing up a steam locomotive in New York and it causing a Grandfather clock to fall on the King of Hawaii's head.
Last edited:
Right Divider
Body part
You're completely confused as to what the "three-body problem" is.
It's about the limits of OUR human understanding and NOT anything else.
The three-body problem has nothing to do with what is possible for the motion of multiple bodies under the influence of a multitude of physical forces.
Again, you're ignoring tons of Dr. Brown's (and Bryan Nickel's) work on the subject.
Last edited:
VladtheDestroyer
Active member
I'll admit that that part always seemed like bit of a stretch to me. (But don't objects in space eventually begin to orbit each other -as long as they are close enough an on the same trajectory? I forget.)
I do know that the main ideas behind Walt's theory eventually require an extensive amount of scientific training in order to fully evaluate it from the ground up. And there may never again be anyone who was as qualified and as dedicated to this topic as Walt was.
I love that Walt quantifies the total amount of energy released for the reader, in terms of nuclear bombs, just to make it easier for us to grasp the amount of energy involved. And now the amateurish "debunkings" you find on YT say "See! That's enough nuclear bombs to vaporise the planet!" as if it's the same thing.
The amount of energy the earth receives from the sun is equal to like many 10s of trillions of atomic bombs, annually.
Last edited:
I am 1000% not confused at all about what the three-body problem is.
The rest of your post is moot.
Right Divider
Body part
Denial will get you nowhere.
No, it's not.
The three-body problem has no bearing whatsoever to the HPT... any aspect of it.
No. Orbits are quite difficult to achieve accidentally. That's why all the theories require vast clouds of material to exist at the beginning of such systems. The vast majority of the material either coalesces into larger bodies or gets ejected out of the system and only that portion of the material that was in just the right place ends up in orbit around anything.
I agree with every syllable of what you said here. The theory is quite brilliant and Walt was brilliant and serious and thorough and quite humble and sincere about his theory. It's just that this particular section, so far as I've been able to determine, was simply wrong and for a variety of reasons. None of which have anything to do with vaporizing the planet. The focused nature of these jets that supposedly sent stuff off into outer space would have vaporized whatever material was being ejected, but not anything that was outside of the jet.
When we send someone to the moon and back, when they reenter the atmosphere they traveling something like 30 times the speed of sound and we have to spend a great deal of effort to design things in such a way as to prevent the space craft from disintegrating due to nothing other than the friction forces involved. Now imagine something traveling at 5 times that fast. The problem isn't just five times as bad, the issue ramps up in a geometric fashion. In fact, the heating rate increases with the cube of the velocity. That's 125 times the heating rate.
If superheated water were blasted outward through the atmosphere at Mach 160, it would not stay together as “water.” It would expand violently, flash into steam, break into molecules and ions, and turn into a rapidly spreading plasma/shock front. At sea level, it would be vastly worse because the air is dense. The blast would dump energy into the atmosphere almost immediately. Most of the material would dissociate into hydrogen and oxygen and then ionize into plasma, spread out, decelerate violently, and dump a tremendous amount of energy into the atmosphere rather than travel upward as a coherent mass. Higher up in the atmosphere, where the air is thinner, more of it could keep moving and in near-vacuum, it could expand outward much more freely, but even then, it would behave like an expanding gas/plasma cloud, not a jet of water.
And none of that touches the issues involved in accelerating all of that water and rock up to such a speed in only a very few seconds, which would turn it all into plasma before it ever broke the surface. The G forces alone (approximately 280g if it took 20 seconds to achieve Mach 160) would prevent the water from accelerating as a neat mass. It would be violently compressed, torn apart, flash-heated, atomized, and converted into a superheated plasma. In short, the water would not behave like a projectile. It would behave like part of the explosion.