Freethought & Rationalism Archive

02-21-2002, 11:46 AM

I read with interest you article diclaiming the Noahic Flood since there couldn't possibly be that much water, or rain for that much time.

May I suggest the book "In the Beginning: Compelling Evidence for Creation and the Flood" by Dr. Walt Brown.

The whole book is on-line at <a href="http://www.creationscience.com/" target="_blank">http://www.creationscience.com/</a>

Thanks,

Oze McCallum

-DM- · 02-21-2002, 01:41 PM

Oze:

You didn't specify the title , the author, or the URL of the article in question -- all of which are requested by the large "HEY YOU!" message at the top of the Feedback main page. Although we don't normally accept the posting of feedback to unidentified articles -- nor do we normally accept offsite URLs unless they pertain to a specific article on the Secular Web and/or they have received prior approval -- I'm going to assume that your feedback pertains to <a href="http://www.infidels.org/library/magazines/tsr/1993/2/2noah93.html" target="_blank">Common Sense and Noah's Flood</a> by Farrell Till and I will therefore let it stand as is so that I can add my comments.

---------

If you find Dr. Brown's book, In the Beginning: Compelling Evidence for Creation and the Flood, "compelling" (as he apparently does) then I think that you need to do more reading. I would also suggest that you become a <a href="http://iidb.org/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=agree" target="_blank">registered user</a> and take part in the discussions in our <a href="http://iidb.org/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=58&t=000282" target="_blank">Evolution/Creation</a> forum. [Note, I have copied this thread to the Evolution/Creation forum. You can view the comments there by clicking on the preceding link.]

You might want to read through the Talk Origins Archive section entitled <a href="http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-noahs-ark.html" target="_blank">Problems with a Global Flood</a>. This is quoted from that document with specific mention of Dr. Brown:

Quote:

Problems with a Global Flood, Second Edition, by Mark Isaak:
Walt Brown's model proposes that the Flood waters came from a layer of water about ten miles underground, which was released by a catastrophic rupture of the earth's crust, shot above the atmosphere, and fell as rain.

How was the water contained? Rock, at least the rock which makes up the earth's crust, doesn't float. The water would have been forced to the surface long before Noah's time, or Adam's time for that matter. Even a mile deep, the earth is boiling hot, and thus the reservoir of water would be superheated. Further heat would be added by the energy of the water falling from above the atmosphere. As with the vapor canopy model, Noah would have been poached.

Where is the evidence? The escaping waters would have eroded the sides of the fissures, producing poorly sorted basaltic erosional deposits. These would be concentrated mainly near the fissures, but some would be shot thousands of miles along with the water. (Noah would have had to worry about falling rocks along with the rain.) Such deposits would be quite noticeable but have never been seen.

In terms of suggested reading, here are a couple of books which I recommend:
<a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0914384015/InternetInfidelsA" target="_blank">The Noah's Ark Nonsense</a> by Howard Teeple.
<a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0687450934/InternetInfidelsA" target="_blank">Where Is Noah's Ark? Mystery on Mount Ararat</a> by Lloyd R. Bailey, professor of Old Testament at Duke Divinity School.

--Don--

[ February 21, 2002: Message edited by: Don Morgan ]

John Solum · 02-21-2002, 01:51 PM

Brown's claims regarding the San Andreas fault are unsupportable. I wrote a brief article here:

<a href="http://www-personal.umich.edu/~jsolum/yec/earthquakes.html" target="_blank">http://www-personal.umich.edu/~jsolum/yec/earthquakes.html</a>

Automaton · 02-22-2002, 12:51 AM

Hahaha, that book provided a good laugh! Kent Hovind quality!

Jack the Bodiless · 02-22-2002, 02:07 AM

Yeah, I've seen that before.

Brown isn't exactly the sharpest tool in the box, is he? There's only one way that his "underground oceans" could form: by magic. And yet Brown is seriously proposing them as a "scientific" explanation for the Flood. Why not simply declare that God made the Flood by magic and disposed of the water afterwards by magic?

Oze · 02-22-2002, 11:04 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Don Morgan:

<snip>

You might want to read through the Talk Origins Archive section entitled <a href="http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-noahs-ark.html" target="_blank">Problems with a Global Flood</a>. This is quoted from that document with specific mention of Dr. Brown:

Problems with a Global Flood, Second Edition, by Mark Isaak:
Walt Brown's model proposes that the Flood waters came from a layer of water about ten miles underground, which was released by a catastrophic rupture of the earth's crust, shot above the atmosphere, and fell as rain.
How was the water contained? Rock, at least the rock which makes up the earth's crust, doesn't float. The water would have been forced to the surface long before Noah's time, or Adam's time for that matter. Even a mile deep, the earth is boiling hot, and thus the reservoir of water would be superheated. Further heat would be added by the energy of the water falling from above the atmosphere. As with the vapor canopy model, Noah would have been poached.

Dr. Brown does not say that the rock floated. Here is the exact quote from Dr. Brown:

"Some have asked, �How could rock float on water?� The crust did not float on water; water was trapped and sealed under the crust. It was like a thin slab of rock resting on and covering an entire waterbed. As long as the water mattress does not rupture, the heavy slab will rest on top of the less dense water. Unlike a waterbed�s seal, which is only a thin sheet of rubber, the chamber�s seal was compressed rock almost 10 miles thick. Pressures in the crust 5 miles or more below the earth�s surface are so great that the rock wants to flow like highly compressed, extremely stiff putty. The slightest crack or opening, even around a small chunk of rock, could not open from below."

Where is the evidence? The escaping waters would have eroded the sides of the fissures, producing poorly sorted basaltic erosional deposits. These would be concentrated mainly near the fissures, but some would be shot thousands of miles along with the water. (Noah would have had to worry about falling rocks along with the rain.) Such deposits would be quite noticeable but have never been seen.

This is discussed as well:

"Flood Phase. The powerful upward-jetting water rapidly eroded both sides of the 46,000-mile-long rupture an average of 400 miles. About 35% of the sediments were eroded from the basalt below the escaping water.32 Eroded particles (or sediments) were swept up in the waters that gushed out from the rupture, giving the water a thick, muddy consistency. These sediments settled out over the earth�s surface in days, trapping and burying many plants and animals, beginning the process of forming the world�s fossils."

The footnote # 32 adds:
"Twenhofel and Mead reported that the chemical composition of the earth�s sedimentary rock can best be matched by taking 65 parts of granite and 35 parts of basalt. [William H. Twenhofel, Treatise on Sedimentation, 2nd edition (New York: Dover Publications, 1961), pp. 2�3; W. J. Mead, �The Average Igneous Rock,� Journal of Geology, Vol. 22, November�December, 1914, pp. 772�778.] This is a remarkable statement, because the quantities of what turns out to be ten minerals relate to only two parameters: an amount of granite and an amount of basalt. From the above, we can now see why this happens. For every 65 parts eroded above the subterranean chamber, 35 parts of basalt were eroded under the subterranean chamber. This produced almost all the earth�s sediments and sedimentary rock."

In terms of suggested reading, here are a couple of books which I recommend:
<a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0914384015/InternetInfidelsA" target="_blank">The Noah's Ark Nonsense</a> by Howard Teeple.
<a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0687450934/InternetInfidelsA" target="_blank">Where Is Noah's Ark? Mystery on Mount Ararat</a> by Lloyd R. Bailey, professor of Old Testament at Duke Divinity School.

--Don--

[ February 21, 2002: Message edited by: Don Morgan ][/QB]

BLoggins02 · 02-22-2002, 12:35 PM

Oze, for future reference, if you're quoting inside a quote:

Quote:

Please put the person you're quoting in bold like this...

... and then respond to it in non-bold like this.

This way we don't have to sort our what you're saying from what you're quoting. Thanks and welcome to the boards

Kosh · 02-22-2002, 01:25 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by BLoggins02:
quote from Dr. Brown:

"Some have asked, �How could rock float on water?� The crust did
not float on water; water was trapped and sealed under the crust.
It was like a thin slab of rock resting on and covering an entire
waterbed. As long as the water mattress does not rupture, the
heavy slab will rest on top of the less dense water. Unlike a
waterbed�s seal, which is only a thin sheet of rubber, the chamber�sseal was compressed rock almost 10 miles thick. Pressures in the
crust 5 miles or more below the earth�s surface are so great that
the rock wants to flow like highly compressed, extremely stiff putty.
The slightest crack or opening, even around a small chunk of rock,
could not open from below."

That's it. I'm writing my congressman to tell
him I support school vouchers....

gravitybow · 02-22-2002, 02:33 PM

Quote:

Problems with a Global Flood, Second Edition, by Mark Isaak:
Walt Brown's model proposes that the Flood waters came from a layer of water about ten miles underground, which was released by a catastrophic rupture of the earth's crust, shot above the atmosphere, and fell as rain.

Oh, darn. And just when I was about to buy in to the vapor-canopy model.

Quote:

Flood Phase. The powerful upward-jetting water rapidly eroded both sides of the 46,000-mile-long rupture an average of 400 miles

...and promptly turned the Ark into the world's largest floating Easy Bake Oven(tm).
Heat calculations, anyone?

Quote:

Kosh quips:
That's it. I'm writing my congressman to tell
him I support school vouchers....

...and I'm going to start my own school to cash in on those school vouchers. This earth modeling stuff sounds like fun! And the students will love me because I won't make them think too hard about my theory (mainly because I myself won't put much thinking into it before I create it). But my diagrams will be topnotch because I will use the finest quality crayons to produce them.

(edited for spelling...yeah, like it's really going to matter in MY school.)

[ February 22, 2002: Message edited by: gravitybow ]

MOJO-JOJO · 02-26-2002, 07:10 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Jack the Bodiless:
Yeah, I've seen that before.

Brown isn't exactly the sharpest tool in the box, is he? There's only one way that his "underground oceans" could form: by magic. And yet Brown is seriously proposing them as a "scientific" explanation for the Flood. Why not simply declare that God made the Flood by magic and disposed of the water afterwards by magic?

Ahh, yes....but don't you remember that the final rebutting argument in any debate with xtians is that "With God....all things are possible!" <img src="graemlins/notworthy.gif" border="0" alt="[Not Worthy]" />

...And this includes magic!!

But as we in the world of reality and reason know....Tricks are for kids......

02-21-2002, 11:46 AM	#1
Guest Posts: n/a	Noahic Flood I read with interest you article diclaiming the Noahic Flood since there couldn't possibly be that much water, or rain for that much time. May I suggest the book "In the Beginning: Compelling Evidence for Creation and the Flood" by Dr. Walt Brown. The whole book is on-line at <a href="http://www.creationscience.com/" target="_blank">http://www.creationscience.com/</a> Thanks, Oze McCallum

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

02-21-2002, 01:51 PM	#3
John Solum Regular Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 139	Brown's claims regarding the San Andreas fault are unsupportable. I wrote a brief article here: <a href="http://www-personal.umich.edu/~jsolum/yec/earthquakes.html" target="_blank">http://www-personal.umich.edu/~jsolum/yec/earthquakes.html</a>

02-22-2002, 12:51 AM	#4
Automaton Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 717	Hahaha, that book provided a good laugh! Kent Hovind quality!

02-22-2002, 02:07 AM	#5
Jack the Bodiless Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: UK Posts: 5,815	Yeah, I've seen that before. Brown isn't exactly the sharpest tool in the box, is he? There's only one way that his "underground oceans" could form: by magic. And yet Brown is seriously proposing them as a "scientific" explanation for the Flood. Why not simply declare that God made the Flood by magic and disposed of the water afterwards by magic?

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.