FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > IIDB ARCHIVE: 200X-2003, PD 2007 > IIDB Philosophical Forums (PRIOR TO JUN-2003)
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Yesterday at 05:55 AM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 09-16-2002, 12:20 PM   #31
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Posts: 281
Post

Quote:
Originally posted by Amie:
<strong>
Round two Bubba
Batter up! Abacus.

Hi Abacus,
very good question love. ok yes I believe the water was covering the surface of the earth. Where did it come from? well the sources of water are given to us in Genesis7:11, being "fountains of the great deep and windows of heaven" the phrase fountains of the great deep is used only in Genesis 7:11, however "the great deep" and "the deep" are used biblically to refer to the oceans. Genesis 7:11 says that when the flood began there was a breaking up of the fountains, which implies some kind of release. Also there are many volcanic rocks so it is entirely possible that a series of volcanic eruptions led to copious amounts of water bursting through the ground. 70% of what comes from volcanoes is water, often in the form of steam, but water none the less. Either way from these sources thats a hell of a lot of water. Now on to the next water source the "windows of heaven" Genesis 7:12 tells us that it rained for 40 days and 40 nights, and the term is used biblically to describe rainfall. However we can not dismiss the possibility of a water vapor canopy surrounding the earth and if that was the case it can be interpreted as the collapse of a water vapor canopy which became unstable and fell down as rainfall. Technically speaking such canopy would have caused a greenhouse effect, a high temperature climate all around the globe including the icy poles.
[/b]

I'm not sure if you understand just how MUCH of a greenhouse effect you'd be talking about here, in addition to other problems with both the 'fountains of the deep' and a 'vapor canopy'.

First of all, you aren't talking about a trivial amount of water here. Even assuming as many YEC's assume that the mountains were much smaller pre-flood (and this has it's own problems, as mountain building itself releases a rather untrivial amount of energy, as would the breakup of continental plates), even adding enough water to the atmosphere to account for 2000ft of precipitation would result in a surface environment which would be completely unliveable.

The first problem is pressure. Even vaporised, enough water to precipitate to 2000ft of water over the entire surface adds it's own weight to the atmosphere. This means that the atmospheric pressure on the earth would be equivalent to the current atmospheric pressure (roughly 10lb/in^2) PLUS the amount of pressure added by being 2000 ft under water. Each 30ft of water adds roughly another atmosphere of pressure - 2000 ft would be roughly 60 atmospheres of pressure, which means that Noah and company would have had roughly 600 lbs of pressure pushing down on them over every square inch on their body. This is roughly the equivalent of wearing an SUV as a hat. BTW, pressure also is directly related to temperature, so it would also be quite hot. You mentioned a greenhouse effect, and you're quite right...but not a greenhouse effect similar to, say Hawaii's climate....more like Venus' climate (Venus, btw, owes its summery temperature of roughly 700 degrees to the greenhouse and pressure effects of its massive 'vapor canopy')

Next problem of course, which applies to all the above methods of generating precipitation (fountains of the deep, vapor canopy, etc), has to do with the vaporization energy of water. To turn water into a vapor to get it into the atmosphere so as to be able to fall as rain, energy must be put INTO the water, and that energy will return to the enviroment when the water precipitates as rain. This is no trivial amount of rain we're talking about, and its similarly, no trivial amount of energy. The amount of energy required, no matter whether it comes from the 'vapor canopy', or 'fountains of the deep', would be sufficient, especially when considering all the vaporization energy would be released over a period of only 40 days and nights, to parboil everything on the planet.

Quote:
[b]
Also a vapor canopy would affect the wind systems and since way back when, mountains would not have been as high as they are today. However the water vapor is only a theory and I am not taking the side of such theory. I am inclined to believe that the volcanic activity that would be associated with the breaking up of the ocean floor would have created a wall of super heated steam from the ocean causing global rain.
</strong>
Now where did all the energy of this 'superheated steam' go? Energy just doesn't disappear, it goes into the environment. Every droplet that you propose entered the atmosphere had the energy equivalent of a temperature of at LEAST 220 degrees (more actually, since it also had kinetic energy sufficient to propel it high into the atmosphere...a LOT more).

You propose entire OCEANS of water that were boiling hot when sent into the atmosphere to rain down. That energy just doesn't go 'poof' and all of a sudden cool down.

Imagine the effects on the temperature of the earth if our oceans were heated to 220 degrees. The amount of water you propose is at LEAST several times this.

Cheers,

The San Diego Atheist
SanDiegoAtheist is offline  
Old 09-16-2002, 12:37 PM   #32
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: South Dakota
Posts: 2,214
Post

Quote:
Originally posted by SanDiegoAtheist:
<strong>

Now where did all the energy of this 'superheated steam' go? Energy just doesn't disappear, it goes into the environment. Every droplet that you propose entered the atmosphere had the energy equivalent of a temperature of at LEAST 220 degrees (more actually, since it also had kinetic energy sufficient to propel it high into the atmosphere...a LOT more).

You propose entire OCEANS of water that were boiling hot when sent into the atmosphere to rain down. That energy just doesn't go 'poof' and all of a sudden cool down.

Imagine the effects on the temperature of the earth if our oceans were heated to 220 degrees. The amount of water you propose is at LEAST several times this.

Cheers,

The San Diego Atheist</strong>

Thanks San Diego Atheist. This is the point I was going to make, but it seems you beat me to it. I don't think having an ocean's worth of superheated steam in the atmosphere would equate to a very comfortable environment. Can we say, broiler oven?

Then again, we're talking about God here. Maybe the ark was provisioned with a super-duper air-conditioning system.
Abacus is offline  
Old 09-16-2002, 12:48 PM   #33
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 1,047
Post

Quote:
Originally posted by HelenM:
<strong>Infinity Lover you need to shore yourself up against the winking smily if you're that easily won over. It could get you in trouble otherwise

Helen</strong>
(Hypnotized)
m-u-s-t
s-h-o-r-e
m-y-s-e-l-f
u-p
a-g-a-i-n-s-t
w-i-n-k-i-n-g
s-m-i-l-y

Okay, for some actual problems (besides the ark most probably being impossible to build without 'divine intervention')

A lot of animals are extremely sensitive to stress and prone to dying in captivity (especially in too small a space).

Some species have very specific diets.

Noah wasn't a biologist I wildly guess.

Marcel
Infinity Lover is offline  
Old 09-16-2002, 01:39 PM   #34
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Orions Belt
Posts: 3,911
Post

Perhaps, rather than point out the many problems that the flood story causes for physics and boat building logistics (which is really just physics again), and wait for Amiee to some back with "godidit", (besides, all this has been hashed out here before), we should focus on what we were promised.....

Evidence that the Flood occurred.

Amiee?
Kosh is offline  
Old 09-16-2002, 02:04 PM   #35
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Orient, OH USA
Posts: 1,501
Post

She seems to have flown the coup...just when this was getting interesting.

Aime, since you said you'd answer specific questions, just what would it take in terms of evidence to make you stop believing in a worldwide flood?

Bubba
Bubba is offline  
Old 09-16-2002, 02:12 PM   #36
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 93
Post

If someone has a literal belief in the Noas Ark story, it's pretty clear they don't want to worry about things like facts and common sense.

There are animals found in Australia only, how did Noah get them? Keep in mind that Australia was unknown to people in the middle east 2000 years ago, and the bible makes no mention of Australia.

I just thought of something else. Noah must have been pretty hard if he could take on a few lions, tigers, aligators, and other dangerous predators and put them in an ark.
shinobi909 is offline  
Old 09-16-2002, 02:33 PM   #37
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: New York
Posts: 1,626
Post

Kosh: patience is a virtue, go get some.
Bubba: have that popcorn ready dear?
Hi Lone Wolf,
you were next I believe. Note that the bible tells us that only land dwelling, air breathing animals and birds were taken on the Ark. you asked a question about the fish. Now if the whole earth was covered by water there would have been a mixing of fresh and salt waters, however we do not know how salty the sea was prior to the flood, I expect they were much less salty than the oceans we know. The flood would have been associated with massive earth movements, due to the weight of the water, which would have resulted in volcanic activity. We know that volcanoes produce enormous amounts of steam and lava creates hot water and steam which disolves minerals adding salt to the water. Also the movement of the water off of the continents would have caused erosion adding more salt to the water. Now as far as fish coping with another environment we know that fresh water fish absorb the water because the saltiness of their body fluids draws in water and saltwater fish lose water from their bodies because the surrounding water is saltier than their bodies. Isn't osmosis a beautiful thing? now many of todays marine organisms are able to survive changes in salinity, starfish are a perfect example. And there are species of fish that travel between fresh and salt water. Salmon, striped bass and Atlantic spurgeon spawn in fresh water and mature in salt water. Eels reproduce in salt water and then grow to mature in fresh water lakes. So some of todays species are able to adapt to both environments and aside from that many families of fish contain both fresh and saltwater species such as the bowfin, sturgeon, herring/anchovy(blech), salmon/trout/pike, catfish, clingfish, scorpionfish, flatfish to name some. This may suggest the ability to tolerate large changes in salinity was poresent in the fish of Noah's days. Natural selection may have resulted in the loss of this ability in many species since then. There is also the possibility that fresh water and salt water layers developed, I am not inclined to take that position however we know that fresh water can sit on top of salt water for extended periods of time. Due to the high latitudes, turbulence of the flood may have been pretty low to allow some sort of layering to take place. who knows eh?...Lone Wolf if I am forgetting to answer something feel free to scmack meh

why do I have a feeling that my friend from Australia who's reading this is laughing right now
Amie~
Amie is offline  
Old 09-16-2002, 02:37 PM   #38
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: New York
Posts: 1,626
Post

Quote:
Originally posted by Bubba:
<strong>She seems to have flown the coup...just when this was getting interesting. </strong>
no, I have to take my time. I work, go to school, do homework, grade papers, and I am in the faculty school music number at school so I am trying to learn the words from Xanadu, and sleep very occasionally. I won't evade however I will answer when i can. My time is limited on the internet.
Amie is offline  
Old 09-16-2002, 02:43 PM   #39
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Southwest USA
Posts: 4,093
Post

Quote:
...I am trying to learn the words from Xanadu...
Somehow, I just knew that!
Tristan Scott is offline  
Old 09-16-2002, 02:44 PM   #40
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: New York
Posts: 1,626
Post

Quote:
Originally posted by ReasonableDoubt:
<strong>Amie,

First of all, thanks for playing. When you get around to it, could I get a rough date range for this flood? Thanks, and remember: "Nicht die Kinder bloß speist man Mit Märchen ab." [Gotthold Ephraim Lessing]</strong>
I just have to add this really quickly...
First,
I am happy to play, yes I'll see what I can do
and Ach, aber wer kann zwischen Marchen, Metaphor, und Jeck sich unterscheiden?
Amie~
Amie is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 01:53 PM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.