The Flood is proof of the Creation

[Tambora]

Looks like I stand corrected!

Not necessarily, although if they didn't all die then it's moot anyways.

Well idk. Plants can grow pretty quick when conditions permit. Perhaps an olive pit was atop one of the higher hills and found purchase and grew there for weeks or maybe months before the dove came along?

On a lighter note, here's an audio skit from a vinyl recording Bill Cosby did in 1965 on Noah and the Ark.

8 minutes

My favorite line ....
"Have you looked down there? Who's gonna clean up that mess down there?!"

 

[Right Divider]

Does the scientific community applaud their explanation?

Here's some more good info on that topic. It's from the QA section of In the Beginning titled Why Don’t Creationists Publish in Leading Science Journals?

Scientists should want their conclusions critiqued, or
refereed, by their peers (peer review). Researchers who
believe their work is important should try to publish that
work. However, leading science journals will not accept
papers published elsewhere. (That stipulation alone
eliminates any portion of this book from consideration.)
Seldom would a science journal publish a paper more
than 6 pages in length. (That also prevents the hydroplate
theory, pages 109–435, from being published in a journal.)

 

[Derf]

Then make science line up with a supernatural virgin birth.

Science has the ability today to effect a virgin birth. Something similar happens with test tube babies, snowflake embryo adoption and cloning.

 

[Idolater]

... The fountains themselves were ice cold, subzero, the only thing keeping them from freezing was the level of mineral content, which would have drastically lowered its freezing point. ...

It doesn't appear to me that water can be both supercritical and ice cold, not if I'm reading phase diagrams correctly. If it was ice cold it wasn't supercritical and if it was supercritical it couldn't have been ice cold.

 

[Derf]

It doesn't appear to me that water can be both supercritical and ice cold, not if I'm reading phase diagrams correctly. If it was ice cold it wasn't supercritical and if it was supercritical it couldn't have been ice cold.

Temperature drops rapidly when pressure is reduced rapidly. P=VxT (pressure = volume x temperature) is the main equation of thermodynamics. If the pressure, P, drops, and volume of water stays the same, the temperature has to drop proportionately.

 

[JudgeRightly]

It doesn't appear to me that water can be both supercritical and ice cold, not if I'm reading phase diagrams correctly. If it was ice cold it wasn't supercritical and if it was supercritical it couldn't have been ice cold.

What Derf said...

But you're not quite paying attention.

What I said was the FOUNTAINS were ice cold, not the underground chambers of water.

 

[Idolater]

Temperature drops rapidly when pressure is reduced rapidly. P=VxT (pressure = volume x temperature) is the main equation of thermodynamics. If the pressure, P, drops, and volume of water stays the same, the temperature has to drop proportionately.

Huh. So when a high pressure steam pipe ruptures you wouldn't burn to death but freeze to death? Never would have thought that.

 

[Idolater]

What Derf said...

But you're not quite paying attention.

What I said was the FOUNTAINS were ice cold, not the underground chambers of water.

You're extremely condescending to me. For someone so much younger than me.

 

[Derf]

Huh. So when a high pressure steam pipe ruptures you wouldn't burn to death but freeze to death? Never would have thought that.

Depends on how much expansion of the steam has occurred before it hits your skin, and how much pressure it was under prior to the rupture. I'm not a proponent for all aspects of the HPT, but it's an intriguing theory with some good points. Firmament equaling earth equaling heaven not equaling firmament of the heavens isn't one of those good points (nor is it necessary, imo).

 

[JudgeRightly]

Huh. So when a high pressure steam pipe ruptures you wouldn't burn to death but freeze to death? Never would have thought that.

When you go from 60 miles below the surface of the earth, from supercritical, up through the rupture in the crust, the fluid expands greatly, drastically reducing it's temperature, and it would have continued to expand up (not to the sides much) through the atmosphere, getting even colder.

It's the same principle when you use canned, pressurized air (or any fluid, for that matter). The can may be at room temperature before you use it, but if you continue to spray whatever is inside the can, the can starts to get very cold. That's because the temperature of a fluid drops as it expands.

 

[Derf]

When you go from 60 miles below the surface of the earth, from supercritical, up through the rupture in the crust, the fluid expands greatly, drastically reducing it's temperature, and it would have continued to expand up (not to the sides much) through the atmosphere, getting even colder.

It's the same principle when you use canned, pressurized air (or any fluid, for that matter). The can may be at room temperature before you use it, but if you continue to spray whatever is inside the can, the can starts to get very cold. That's because the temperature of a fluid drops as it expands.

Also, air conditioning and geothermal heating both rely on the change in pressure to produce a change in temperature.

 

[1Mind1Spirit]

When you go from 60 miles below the surface of the earth,

Speculation at best.
Nobody has ever drilled 60 miles below the surface let alone been there.

 

[1Mind1Spirit]

That's because the temperature of a fluid drops as it expands.

Really?
Where do you get the idea that water determines temperature?
Or that it expands other than at freezing?
http://www.actforlibraries.org/substances-that-expand-when-they-freeze/#:~:text=It should be noted that liquid water does,is denser than ice at 22 degrees F!
It should be noted that liquid water does NOT expand as it gets colder. water at 41 degrees F is DENSER than water at 42 degrees F; it is only when freezing that this phenomenon occurs. In fact, ice at 21 degrees F is denser than ice at 22 degrees F!

 

[JudgeRightly]

Speculation at best.

It's not.

Nobody has ever drilled 60 miles below the surface let alone been there.

We don't have to. We know that sound travels at different speeds throughout different materials. That's how it was measured.

Really?
Where do you get the idea that water determines temperature?

Not what I said.

Temperature and pressure (among other factors) determines the state of any fluid.

Or that it expands other than at freezing?

We're talking about supercritical fluids, not just water.

http://www.actforlibraries.org/substances-that-expand-when-they-freeze/#:~:text=It should be noted that liquid water does,is denser than ice at 22 degrees F!
It should be noted that liquid water does NOT expand as it gets colder. water at 41 degrees F is DENSER than water at 42 degrees F; it is only when freezing that this phenomenon occurs. In fact, ice at 21 degrees F is denser than ice at 22 degrees F!

It does when the pressure changes, and the article you linked to is talking about under normal circumstances, where temperature drops slowly over a period of time, regarding a mostly stationary body of water, NOT the fountains of the great deep, which were violent enough to send about 3% of earth's original total mass into space.

Going from being a supercritical fluid under enormous pressures under the crust, to the vacuum of space, the fluids under the crust of the earth would have bypassed becoming solid ice, and would have been more of a slush by the time it reached the upper atmosphere, full of minerals, which lowered it's freezing point to WELL below 0 degrees Celsius, and would have cooled off rapidly, while still remaining unfrozen.

Please take a look at this list of HPT objections, and the answers to the objections, found here:

RSR Answers the Hydroplate Theory Heat Problem | KGOV.com

kgov.com

 

[Idolater]

Depends on how much expansion of the steam has occurred before it hits your skin, and how much pressure it was under prior to the rupture. I'm not a proponent for all aspects of the HPT, but it's an intriguing theory with some good points. Firmament equaling earth equaling heaven not equaling firmament of the heavens isn't one of those good points (nor is it necessary, imo).

When you go from 60 miles below the surface of the earth, from supercritical, up through the rupture in the crust, the fluid expands greatly, drastically reducing it's temperature, and it would have continued to expand up (not to the sides much) through the atmosphere, getting even colder.

It's the same principle when you use canned, pressurized air (or any fluid, for that matter). The can may be at room temperature before you use it, but if you continue to spray whatever is inside the can, the can starts to get very cold. That's because the temperature of a fluid drops as it expands.

Also, air conditioning and geothermal heating both rely on the change in pressure to produce a change in temperature.

I'm aware of this. But in all these analogies we're not dealing with supercritical water. When supercritical water is released under the ocean it comes out steaming hot. And regarding pressurized containers that are at room temperature, yes, when pressure is released cooling occurs because the pressurized liquid needs a ton of heat in order to vaporize, but again supercritical water is already hot enough I believe to burn dried wood or paper, so all that heat has to go somewhere, it's not sucking up more heat, it already has the heat it needs to vaporize so how could it become cold by the time it reaches the surface? I mean, if we're talking about half the world's water is coming gushing up all at once, and all that water was supercritical, superheated water, then even if you 'douse' it with the other half of the planet's water, it's still going to be somewhat warm, wouldn't you think?

 

[Idolater]

I have a HPT question.

If the crust was 'floating' on a bed of [supercritical] water----which is, btw, a wonderful way to make a planet I think for people to live on. Give us a firm bed of rock to live on, but have that bed of rock floating on water, that sounds perfect to me.

So if this was the case, then the crust must have been sealed tight all the way around the globe, to never let out any of that water. So what about tidal forces? Wouldn't that stress the crust, possibly rupturing the tiniest fissure going all the way down to the supercritical water at some point, wouldn't you think? Those forces are powerful, and if the crust was a rigid structure, couldn't it have cracked somewhere just from the moon orbiting the earth?

 

[Right Divider]

I have a HPT question.

If the crust was 'floating' on a bed of [supercritical] water----which is, btw, a wonderful way to make a planet I think for people to live on. Give us a firm bed of rock to live on, but have that bed of rock floating on water, that sounds perfect to me.

So if this was the case, then the crust must have been sealed tight all the way around the globe, to never let out any of that water. So what about tidal forces? Wouldn't that stress the crust, possibly rupturing the tiniest fissure going all the way down to the supercritical water at some point, wouldn't you think? Those forces are powerful, and if the crust was a rigid structure, couldn't it have cracked somewhere just from the moon orbiting the earth?

This is explained clearly in the book and the videos.

In short, NO it would not "stress the crust, possibly rupturing the tiniest fissure going all the way down to the supercritical water at some point". The compression of the granite below 5 miles is sealed tight due to gravity.

 

[JudgeRightly]

I'm aware of this. But in all these analogies we're not dealing with supercritical water. When supercritical water is released under the ocean it comes out steaming hot.

Correct.

And regarding pressurized containers that are at room temperature, yes, when pressure is released cooling occurs because the pressurized liquid needs a ton of heat in order to vaporize, but again supercritical water is already hot enough I believe to burn dried wood or paper, so all that heat has to go somewhere, it's not sucking up more heat, it already has the heat it needs to vaporize so how could it become cold by the time it reaches the surface?

The energy is converted into motion, enough energy was released to send about 3% of the earth's original total mass into space.

I mean, if we're talking about half the world's water is coming gushing up all at once, and all that water was supercritical, superheated water, then even if you 'douse' it with the other half of the planet's water, it's still going to be somewhat warm, wouldn't you think?

I recommend going through this article on kgov.com:

RSR Answers the Hydroplate Theory Heat Problem | KGOV.com

kgov.com

If the crust was 'floating'

It wasn't floating, in any sense of the word.

It sat on 'pillars' made from the lowered portions of the crust (the valleys of which being where the water that was called "Seas" went.

on a bed of [supercritical] water----which is, btw, a wonderful way to make a planet I think for people to live on. Give us a firm bed of rock to live on, but have that bed of rock floating on water, that sounds perfect to me.

Supra.

So if this was the case, then the crust must have been sealed tight all the way around the globe, to never let out any of that water.

This is where a tiny amount of speculation comes in, though it's not hard to see a possible connection:

Remember the river flowing out of the garden, that then split into four rivers that watered the entire earth?

Yeah, that one.

The source of that river must have been huge.

It's not hard to imagine that there was a hole going deep into the earth that connected in some way to the subterranean chamber of water the would have been the source of all that water. And it makes sense, since the Bible describes the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil sitting on a huge source of water that allowed it to grow so big.

In other words, it was a pressure relief valve that simultaneously functioned as a spring that watered the earth. Rather brilliant and sophisticated design, if you ask me...

So what about tidal forces? Wouldn't that stress the crust,

Only if pressure wasn't relieved somehow.

possibly rupturing the tiniest fissure going all the way down to the supercritical water at some point, wouldn't you think?

One of the only problems I can see with the above "relief valve" theory is that once you go below a certain depth, the rock becomes so compressed that it's actually impossible to any gaps in the rock. This would have prevented any fissures from opening up.

Those forces are powerful, and if the crust was a rigid structure,

Considering the scale, NOTHING is that rigid, not even granite. And I'm pretty sure God designed it so that it would have been able to withstand the tidal pull of the moon for a very long time, especially since the pressure would have been released via the spring in the garden.

To put it another way, God basically designed the moon as the mechanism for keeping the earth watered, since it's tidal pull would have caused the subterranean waters to warm up, causing it to expand and rise up through the relief valve into the garden, watering the earth, where it would disperse, sink into the ground.

The scale boggles the mind, but it makes sense.

couldn't it have cracked somewhere just from the moon orbiting the earth?

The reason the earth cracked was because the pressure built up too much. The Bible says that there was a world-wide drought at the time, because the river from the garden had dried up, likely because the Tree had grown so big, and the garden so overgrown, that they had stopped up the relief valve (the spring from which the water came from, connected to the subterranean chamber of water), that caused the pressure to build up.

In other words: By God kicking man out of the garden (because his job was originally to tend to the garden), He started a chain reaction that would eventually cause the earth to burst at the seams.

 

[Derf]

Correct.



The energy is converted into motion, enough energy was released to send about 3% of the earth's original total mass into space.



I recommend going through this article on kgov.com:

RSR Answers the Hydroplate Theory Heat Problem | KGOV.com

kgov.com

It wasn't floating, in any sense of the word.

It sat on 'pillars' made from the lowered portions of the crust (the valleys of which being where the water that was called "Seas" went.



Supra.



This is where a tiny amount of speculation comes in, though it's not hard to see a possible connection:

Remember the river flowing out of the garden, that then split into four rivers that watered the entire earth?

Yeah, that one.

The source of that river must have been huge.

It's not hard to imagine that there was a hole going deep into the earth that connected in some way to the subterranean chamber of water the would have been the source of all that water. And it makes sense, since the Bible describes the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil sitting on a huge source of water that allowed it to grow so big.

In other words, it was a pressure relief valve that simultaneously functioned as a spring that watered the earth. Rather brilliant and sophisticated design, if you ask me...



Only if pressure wasn't relieved somehow.



One of the only problems I can see with the above "relief valve" theory is that once you go below a certain depth, the rock becomes so compressed that it's actually impossible to any gaps in the rock. This would have prevented any fissures from opening up.



Considering the scale, NOTHING is that rigid, not even granite. And I'm pretty sure God designed it so that it would have been able to withstand the tidal pull of the moon for a very long time, especially since the pressure would have been released via the spring in the garden.

To put it another way, God basically designed the moon as the mechanism for keeping the earth watered, since it's tidal pull would have caused the subterranean waters to warm up, causing it to expand and rise up through the relief valve into the garden, watering the earth, where it would disperse, sink into the ground.

The scale boggles the mind, but it makes sense.



The reason the earth cracked was because the pressure built up too much. The Bible says that there was a world-wide drought at the time, because the river from the garden had dried up, likely because the Tree had grown so big, and the garden so overgrown, that they had stopped up the relief valve (the spring from which the water came from, connected to the subterranean chamber of water), that caused the pressure to build up.

In other words: By God kicking man out of the garden (because his job was originally to tend to the garden), He started a chain reaction that would eventually cause the earth to burst at the seams.

Are you saying Adam's tending of the garden would have prevented the tree's roots from growing too big or too deep?

 

[JudgeRightly]

Are you saying Adam's tending of the garden would have prevented the tree's roots from growing too big or too deep?

Had Adam not sinned, it stands to reason that he and his descendants would have been able to maintain the garden, which probably could have slowed its growth.

Remember, God said don't eat of it, not "don't touch."

I don't know much about tree maintenance, especially for a tree with that big of a water source, but I'm pretty sure that pruning it would have limited its size somewhat.

But since God kicked him out of the garden when he sinned, He probably just let it grow unattended.