-->
@BrotherDThomas
You’re not the hero the religious forum needs. You are the hero the religious forum deserves.
Science Agrees With The Bible:Earth's Water
Posts
Total:
81
-->
@Ramshutu
That’s what “earths magma contains water in volumes that are variable“ means..
No sir it doesn't. Magma is molten rock genius.
So, the Bible is not particularly specific: it simply says water came from beneath the earth.
True. And at first atheists were like "Har, har!! Until science caught up and found there IS more than enough water inside the Earth.
Did such a flood happen? No: science can rule that one out.
Science once "ruled out" enough water on Earth to cover every peak.
Is it possible for it to happen? No: this water is not free water; and is locked up in magma hundreds of miles beneath the surface - not as water, but as OH Hydroxyl molecules bound to magma.
You've back paddled. You use to say there was simply not enough water on Earth. But sorry, science has found that under certain conditions, this water can be brought to the surface.
Is it feasible: the idea that billions of square kilometres of magma will simply move to the surface - not without kinda leaving a note.
It's not, magma man of science. It's water.
So at best; this new scientific revelation is that there now maybe being enough water - possibly - to maybe cover the earth (again - it’s not clear whether it’s confirmed sufficient), in the form of inaccessible Hydroxyl Bound to magma
Lol. Funny how new scientific revelations always confirm the Bible's narrative. And it's not magma. Magma is rock that has become so hot due to pressure that it is molten, it comes out of volcanoes.
Given the thousand other ways that the flood has been comprehensively ruled out - amount of water is low hanging fruit.
All I know is that the "there isn't enough water" chant is dead. You back paddle well.
There are hundreds thousands of scientific studies that demonstrate old earth. Demonstrate evolution, demonstrate that life has a common ancestor, demonstrate the lack of any population bottlenecks, demonstrate the local nature of various flood around the world, and explicitly rule out a cataclysmic global flood as described in Genesis
Non sequitur. None of this support your charge that I'm cherry picking.
You pointed to individual cases of data that seem to confirm your position...
I pointed to an individual case of data that is consistent with my position. That is how science works.
...while ignoring a significant portion of related and similar cases or data that contradicts that position.
You have no data that contradicts. You used to think not enough water was data that contradicted that position.
...that demonstrate old earth.
How does that contradict the Bible?
...Demonstrate evolution,
Evolution has never been demonstrated.
...demonstrate that life has a common ancestor,
I might post some recent scientific studies that question this claim. A common ancestor is an assumption, not a demonstrated fact.
...demonstrate the lack of any population bottlenecks,
This is not only laughable, it's irrelevant.
...demonstrate the local nature of various flood around the world, and explicitly rule out a cataclysmic global flood as described in Genesis.
Untrue. Science can only "rule out" a global flood within a time frame if in the relatively recent past. Noah's flood has never been "ruled out" by science, it is scientists with agendas that do so.
Your argument bullseyes the text book definition of cherry picking.
Is there now enough water? Yes.
That's the cherry on top.🍒
You’re not the hero the religious forum needs. You are the hero the religious forum deserves.
The only bigotry still welcome on Dart. Homosexuals and pedophiles we protect, theists we hate.
Tell us how you feel about Jews and African Americans too Ram.
-->
@ethang5
No sir it doesn't. Magma is molten rock genius.
Erm - yes? That’s why “It just moves between the mantle and the surface” is what “earths magma contains water in volumes that are variable” means. Did you lose track of what you were arguing?
True. And at first atheists were like "Har, har!! Until science caught up and found there IS more than enough water inside the Earth.
In the magma...
Science once "ruled out" enough water on Earth to cover every peak.
No it didn’t. You are confusing “known water reserves are insufficient to cover the earth”, and “we absolutely know without reasonable doubt how much water was in the earth. Not the same.
In this respect we absolutely can rule out all those things; because the evidence explicitly rules them our
Is it possible for it to happen? No: this water is not free water; and is locked up in magma hundreds of miles beneath the surface - not as water, but as OH Hydroxyl molecules bound to magma.
You've back paddled. You use to say there was simply not enough water on Earth. But sorry, science has found that under certain conditions, this water can be brought to the surface.
Firstly when did I ever say that? That’s like the 4927th reason id invoke against a global flood
Secondly. The conditions the water can be brought to the surface is when pockets of magma interact with the world; and given the properties of magma are as you put “Magma is molten rock genius.” it ain’t going to come out as a liquid...
Pretty sure that Cataclysmic volcanic activity overturning billions of square kilometres of magma to release its water; would not be described as water spurting from the ground, but a burning hellfire that vaporized every ocean on the planet .
Is it feasible: the idea that billions of square kilometres of magma will simply move to the surface - not without kinda leaving a note.
It's not, magma man of science. It's water.
Water trapped in the magma genius.
Lol. Funny how new scientific revelations always confirm the Bible's narrative.
Except, of course, when it doesn’t...
And it's not magma. Magma is rock that has become so hot due to pressure that it is molten, it comes out of volcanoes.
Yeah - that’s where this extra water is trapped. As hydroxyl bound to the molten rock...
Non sequitur. None of this support your charge that I'm cherry picking.
Yes it does actually. I provided you the definition of cherry picking and showed what you’re doing exactly matches it.
Definition of cherry picking:
Cherry picking, or the fallacy of incomplete evidence is the act of pointing to individual cases or data that seem to confirm a particular position while ignoring a significant portion of related and similar cases or data that may contradict that position.
What you did.
You pointed to individual cases of data that seem to confirm your position while ignoring a significant portion of related and similar cases or data that contradicts that position.
Let me spell this out, as simply as I can.
Science has hundreds of thousands of studies that comprehensively disprove what the Bible says. It has a handful of examples that can be argued to be consistent with what the Bible says.
Using the ones that Agree with you, and ignoring all the ones that do not - is cherry picking.
Please block quote this whole thing and reply to it in one go; you just went line by line and completely lost any semblance of a point lol.
-->
@Ramshutu
No sir it doesn't. Magma is molten rock genius.
Erm - yes? That’s why “It just moves between the mantle and the surface” is what “earths magma contains water in volumes that are variable” means. Did you lose track of what you were arguing?
Ah, lol! That's why you keep saying magma. You really should look up magma and bone up on geology before you post again. The water is in the Earth's mantle, not in magma.
No it didn’t. You are confusing “known water reserves are insufficient to cover the earth”, and “we absolutely know without reasonable doubt how much water was in the earth. Not the same.
Which is why only atheists on websites like this brought up the "not enough water on Earth" clunker.
That’s like the 4927th reason id invoke against a global flood
It is now. Yes.
The conditions the water can be brought to the surface is when pockets of magma interact with the world;
Untrue. Please let's stick to known science and not uninformed conjecture.
Pretty sure that Cataclysmic volcanic activity overturning billions of square kilometres of magma to release its water; would not be described as water spurting from the ground, but a burning hellfire that vaporized every ocean on the planet
And that doesn't clue you in that your "magma" idea is loony? Any water in Rock would be squeezed out under the tremendous pressure needed to make it hot enough to melt, and any water would immediately vaporize out as soon as the pressure dropped long before the magma reached the surface.
Lol. Funny how new scientific revelations always confirm the Bible's narrative.
Except, of course, when it doesn’t...
And someday you will offer one, instead of debunking claims NOT in the Bible, like young Earth.
Science has hundreds of thousands of studies that comprehensively disprove what the Bible says.
This thread is about water on Earth.
It has a handful of examples that can be argued to be consistent with what the Bible says.
And one must list those alleged hundreds of thousands of studies whenever one talks about a specific point?
Using the ones that Agree with you, and ignoring all the ones that do not - is cherry picking.
I have "ignored" nothing, unless you mean that my OP did not contain hundreds of thousands of studies.
This thread is about the water on Earth, not about evolution, or age of the Earth, or common ancestors. You wish to deflect to those topics because you know atheists have lost the "enough water on Earth" topic.
Please block quote this whole thing and reply to it in one go
Sorry, not when you bury multiple untruths inside single sentences.
-->
@ethang5
I don't really need to be arguing this non-sense Mr E.
But it's entertaining.
So if the polar ice caps melted, the level of all available water on planet Earth would on rise by approx 60m above current sea levels.
That would be approx 8800m short of what would be needed to cover the entire Earth.
There just ain't enough water Mr E.
Floods occur due to temporary and rapid displacements of water and are usually localised.
Chiefly weather related, but sometimes seismic events and rarely geological shifts.
But not magical fountains Mr E.
Magical fountains are the stuff of myths legends and wild imagination.
So Noah entered the Ark at the age of 600, with a enough supplies on board to keep the biggest Zoo ever, going for over a year.
And in seven days it started to RAIN.
What was that I said about myths, legends and wild imagination?
But if it makes you feel good Mr E.....That's good enough for me.
Good lord, you are obtuse.
So first of all. You are 100%, definitely, absolutely cherry picking.
You are cherry picking the science that agrees with the bible; ignoring all the other science that does not; and then claiming science validates the bible. Cherry picking
Flying off in to odd tangents; line by line is hilarious, but meaningless. What you’re doing is a form of quote mining - splitting up the proof that you’re cherry picking into lines and responding to each line in a completely different context Than it was clearly meant is intellectually dishonest.
In this case; evolution can rule out the concepts of specially created kinds through generic means. We can rule out a global flood 5-6 thousand years ago by various means ; historical and geological - cataclysmic floods tend to be, well cataclysmic: and leave cataclysmic evidence. We can see, for example, massive extinction events by correlating mass die outs with volcanic activity, and signatures of massive climate change that came with it - or layers of iridium At the K-T boundary radiating out from Mexico where we see geological indications Of a massive meteor strikes (tektites, etc). If a flood happened 6000 years ago, you could go into your garden - any garden and just dig down a few Meters and find evidence. You’d see it in the genetics of all populations - reducing number of individuals to a few founders creates massive genetic issues that can be traced to particular times.
In this respect ; a global flood can 100% be ruled out as plausible.
Secondly. The water under the surface - is based on a single study (that I am aware of), which uses the existence of >>magma<< : melted rock at depths of up to 400 miles to infer the presence of water at those depths. When ocean zones subduct, water in the ocean and the rocks are melted into >> magma << creating a reservoir of water (in the form of hydroxyl molecules) transported into the deeper layers of rock. This water is trapped under the crust of the earth until the medium containing it moves to the surface - this is the form of melted rock containing water reaching the surface. Molten rock contain many various gasses dissolved within - water, sulfer dioxide, carbon dioxide. High gas content magma releases these gasses when the pressure drops enough for the gas to undisolve - think shaken can of coke.
We have a name for what’s happens when the pressure of magma drops sufficiently to allow the gas it contains to undissolve: a volcanic eruption.
In this case, the high pressure of magma - even a few km below the surface can keep gases dissolved within; even through temperature of thousands of degrees.
Of course - you seem to not actually understand this given the hilarious quote below:
“Any water in Rock would be squeezed out under the tremendous pressure needed to make it hot enough to melt, and any water would immediately vaporize out as soon as the pressure dropped long before the magma reached the surface.”
This is absurd for a number of reasons. There is so much wrong with this lol:
- If water in rock is squeezed out under pressure as it melts - then where the hell did all this water you claim was on the surface go? You’re claiming it can’t go back below the surface.... where... it was ... found.. or in other words - you are arguing the water that was found cannot have been on the surface.
- Water below the crust is not in water form, it’s in dissolved form. It can’t be “squeezed out” unless there is a high pressure gradient. Lol
- Water trapped in various rock layers will only vaporize - aka flash to steam - if the force the water exerts on its surroundings exceeds then amount of pressure the surroundings are able to contain. Just as a FYI, a water droplet trapped under 2km of Non porous rock is not going to turn to steam....
I suggest you read the study your nonsense is based on :
- one study.
- amount of water is merely a speculative conjecture based on one inclusion in a diamond.
- the presence of water is assumed based on inferred dehydration melting
- the Upper and lower mantle rocks themselves do not appear contain much water.
So it’s kinda odd that this is the hill you want to die on.
-->
@ethang5
.
EtHAMg5, the Ham Cursed king of non sequiturs,
To the membership, guess what time it is boys and girls? Yes, it is time for EtHAMg5 to once again RUN AWAY from Jesus' true words within the scriptures! Hooray!
Since the Bible stupid EtHAMg5 can't discuss the Christian Religion with me as he proposed shown in this link: https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/6789/post-links/293088 , then I will address this question for the membership that EtHAMg5 is to answer. Here we go, or will we watch EtHAMg5 runaway again in proving he is Bible stupid? :(
EtHAMg5, all of the aspects of this question to you are shown in my post #6 that you have literally RAN AWAY from because of your outright Bible stupidity:
EtHAMg5, your question this time for the membership, is how did Noah fit 16 Argentinosaurus dinosaurs that are 130 feet in length, and are 110 tons apiece, and 70 feet tall into the Ark? Since the height of the Ark was only 45 feet, whereas did Noah have to cut out the beam of the Ark to give these tall dinosaurs room to stick their heads out?
Since each Argentinosaurus dinosaur weighs approximately 1,760 tons apiece x 16 pairs of them equals 28,160 tons, notwithstanding 16 large African Bush elephants weighing in at 6 tons apiece X 16 pairs totaling 96 more tons, whereas, with just these two animals alone it equals 28,256 total tons which would sink any gopher wood vessel like the Ark! Furthermore, this does not include the other 19.2 million animal species that had to be upon the Ark as well! How do you respond?
EtHAMg5, WAIT A GOD DAMN MINUTE, do I see in my minds eye you once again putting on your Satanic “running shoes” to run away from yet another Godly inspired by Jesus question as shown within this post, which makes you once again the total and laughable Bible fool that you are! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=krTAzjoTuuY
-->
@ethang5
@Ramshutu
Ramushutu,
Just in case you are unaware of the "Ham Curse" that Jesus has bestowed upon the Bible stupid EtHAMg5 because he is a black man, and at this time, we can see that poor ol' EtHAMg5 is still having a very hard time accepting this dreadful curse, which shows in his totally inept refutations to your astute answers of the topic at hand to him. As if EtHAMg5's Bible stupidity wasn't enough, then he reads his pseudo-christian apologetic books upon this threads topic where in essence, the book and him represent the blind leading the blind as you so accurately show with your indisputable answers to him!
We keep EtHAMg5 around for comedic entertainment relative to his Bible ignorance and stupidity of same, where he has yet to realize that he shouldn't even be in a Religion Forum discussing Christianity and Jesus because of his "Ham Curse," because in him being here he becomes meaningless and just flotsam to easily sweep aside. But, like I have said many times, every Religion Forum on the internet has to have their totally Bible stupid members, where we have ours in EtHAMg5 and the runaway from biblical axioms, Tradesecret.
EtHAMg5's "Ham Curse" explained herewith where he has lost all recognition within this esteemed Religion Forum:
-->
@zedvictor4
I don't really need to be arguing this non-sense Mr E.But it's entertaining.So if the polar ice caps melted, the level of all available water on planet Earth would on rise by approx 60m above current sea levels.That would be approx 8800m short of what would be needed to cover the entire Earth.There just ain't enough water Mr E.
I see you decided not to read the links and remain ignorant. Science will go on without you.
Magical fountains are the stuff of myths legends and wild imagination
I'll be sure to let the scientists who have just found 3 times the Earth's oceans worth of water inside the Earth.
But if it makes you feel good Mr E.....That's good enough for me.
Yep. I will make your credulity my standard immediately. Since reality resides between your ears, if you don't believe it, how can it exist??
But it's entertaining
I'll say! Try tossing the moron DeeDee if you really want fun.
-->
@Ramshutu
You are cherry picking the science that agrees with the bible; ignoring all the other science that does not; and then claiming science validates the bible. Cherry picking
No Sir. I said science validates one claim of the Bible, that there is enough water on Earth for Noah's flood. You are trying to insert an argument for me...
The Bible needs no validation.
We can rule out a global flood 5-6 thousand years ago by various means
Noah's flood did not happen 5 to 6 thousand years ago. It is a much older event.
If water in rock is squeezed out under pressure as it melts - then where the hell did all this water you claim was on the surface go?
I did not say rocks (or magma) came out. I said water. You brought out the magma clunker.
Water below the crust is not in water form, it’s in dissolved form. It can’t be “squeezed out” unless there is a high pressure gradient.
I called it "tremendous pressure". Perhaps you missed that?
Just as a FYI, a water droplet trapped under 2km of Non porous rock is not going to turn to steam....
I said nothing about water turning into steam. You did. Please stop wasting my time by creating straw-men and fighting them. You don't need me for that.
- one study
It's more than one study. Your ignorance doesn't make the others not exist.
This is how science is done. We find out things bit by bit. We don't expect the entire picture immediately.
For example, science doesn't know how life began, but it has been picking up clues,
- Life is carbon based
- Amino acids play a role
- All life seems to have a common ancestor
While these clues do not tell us definitely how life began, they are consistent with our current running theories. Scientists aren't cherry-picking.
In this case, we do not currently know the mechanics of Noah's flood, but we are getting clues.
- There IS enough water on Earth
- the rainfall was augmented by water from below the surface
these are consistent with our current running theories.
You want to make this about the larger Noah's flood so you can escape having to concede the limited point of this thread, that there is enough water on the Earth to be consistent with a global flood of the kind mentioned in Genesis.
So it’s kinda odd that this is the hill you want to die on
It's kinda funny (and typical) that you assume I'm gonna die.
-->
@BrotherDThomas
Hey village moron!
Did you see what your moron pal Hari has posted on DDO?
BrotherThomas declares Jesus a racist.
https://www:Debateart.Com/forum/topics/6762-is-it-a-weak-point-that-many-types-of-miracles-of-the-bible-don't-happen-nowadays Page=1&post_number=19
BrotherThomas wrote: EtHAMg5, The Ham cursed black man and king of non sequiturs as he runs away from biblical axioms,
No, Bible fool, I am not racist, But our JUDEO-Christian Bible and Jesus most certainly are!
No, Bible fool, I am not racist, But our JUDEO-Christian Bible and Jesus most certainly are!
So your moron Hindu pal cited where you confessed your disobedience to your Lord Jesus for me. You asked me to show you. Now I have.
And to prove you are a fake and a fraud, you will run from your own cited comments. Like a pseudo-christian hypocrite, you will dodge and preen. To take a page from your own schtick...
BEGIN.
It is a much older event.
That's a tad woolly Mr E.....To say the least.
And throws up all sorts of implications and contradictions.
The Earths geology varies greatly relative to time.
But so does biological evolution.
You and your scientists need to be a good deal more specific.
At what point does the Earths geological development and biological/species development coincide to allow for such an event to be possible?
I would suggest that "science" easily disproves the possibility.
It's no good advocating the "science" that agrees with your biblical commitments, but then denying the science that doesn't agree.
That just makes you appear to be "cherry picking".
Which is what you are doing. Mr E.
No Sir. I said science validates one claim of the Bible, that there is enough water on Earth for Noah's flood. You are trying to insert an argument for me...
Yes - so science agrees with the Bible - except of course for all the cases where it doesn’t
The Bible needs no validation.
And yet you are here....
It's more than one study. Your ignorance doesn't make the others not exist.
By all means share these other studies; I wasn’t able to find more than the single study after a brief search...
In this case, we do not currently know the mechanics of Noah's flood, but we are getting clues.- There IS enough water on Earth- the rainfall was augmented by water from below the surfacethese are consistent with our current running theories.
So the first is theoretical - the second is rank speculation.
Like I said - to get the water out from where it is, it requires magma to overturn; that would be catastrophic, for example at 3% water by volume would require volumes of magma hundreds of times the volume of water covering the ocean to be reaching the surface... that would be .. noticeable.
As I said, we can also rule out a catastrophic global flood on the grounds that it would be detectable - as I described - and it isn’t.
Invalidating is biblical lineages (or assuming people leaves to be tens of millions of years old) aside - the issue is that a stopped clock is right twice a day.
The Bible makes all sorts of claims we can invalidate - but there are some where it’s able to by right by accident. Like this one.
No validation of process, whether anything the Bible said occurred, no way of telling how it happened (and indeed the issues seem insurmountable), and no indication in genetic evidence that it ever did.
However - because a study makes a claim that there *may* be enough water trapped under the earths crust hundreds of miles below the surface - you’re posting as if they discovered the Higgs boson.
I mean: you know you’re clutching at straws when the “validation” of a global flood is that there maybe sufficient water within the entirety of the earth, to potentially cover the land. Yet you are here sounding like you found the bible version of the higgs boson.
-->
@ethang5
EtHAMg5, the Ham Cursed king of non sequiturs,
YOUR PITIFUL QUOTE IN POST #42 IN MAKING YOU THE BLATANT IGNORANT FOOL AGAIN: “So your moron Hindu pal cited where you confessed your disobedience to your Lord Jesus for me. You asked me to show you. Now I have."
Where did Harikrish perform this act because I would like to know! All you gave us was a broken link regarding DEBATEART and not DDO, where even when putting the break together in said link, it still doesn’t work! Yeah, you can’t even post a link correctly where you fu*ked up again. Whats new? Nothing! LOL!
You continue to show yourself the fool, why? I asked you 6 times to post the link that I said what you wanted me to say, but you never did. Only NOW did you do this BY HARIKRISH DOING IT FOR YOU where you couldn’t do it yourself! What does that say about your assumed intellect? Duh! How embarrassing can you get in front of the membership again, where its time for you to Wipe the egg from your face again EtHAMg5! LOL!
Do you want my neighbors 1st grader named "Tommy" to show you how to post a link? EtHAMg5, you make it too easy for me to show you being the fool again.
NEXT?
Where did Harikrish perform this act because I would like to know! All you gave us was a broken link regarding DEBATEART and not DDO, where even when putting the break together in said link, it still doesn’t work! Yeah, you can’t even post a link correctly where you fu*ked up again. Whats new? Nothing! LOL!
You continue to show yourself the fool, why? I asked you 6 times to post the link that I said what you wanted me to say, but you never did. Only NOW did you do this BY HARIKRISH DOING IT FOR YOU where you couldn’t do it yourself! What does that say about your assumed intellect? Duh! How embarrassing can you get in front of the membership again, where its time for you to Wipe the egg from your face again EtHAMg5! LOL!
Do you want my neighbors 1st grader named "Tommy" to show you how to post a link? EtHAMg5, you make it too easy for me to show you being the fool again.
NEXT?
-->
@ethang5
@Tradesecret
.
EtHAMg5, the Ham Cursed king of non sequiturs,
YOUR HYPOCRITICAL UNGODLY QUOTE IN YOUR POST #42: “And to prove you are a fake and a fraud, you will run from your own cited comments.
Why should I run away from my comments? Simply put, Jesus is a racist, and I am not, in the same vein as you being totally BIBLE DUMBFOUNDED and a RUNAWAY of same, and perceive yourself at best as a pseudo-christian! Get it Bible fool? Huh? LOL!
Speaking of running away from direct godly inspired comments, and especially addressed to you, why do you remain so SCARED to address my comments to you in your laughable thread as shown in the following links that make your topic embarrassing by not addressing them:
https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/6789/post-links/292928
https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/6789/post-links/293685
https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/6789/post-links/293847
Why should I run away from my comments? Simply put, Jesus is a racist, and I am not, in the same vein as you being totally BIBLE DUMBFOUNDED and a RUNAWAY of same, and perceive yourself at best as a pseudo-christian! Get it Bible fool? Huh? LOL!
Speaking of running away from direct godly inspired comments, and especially addressed to you, why do you remain so SCARED to address my comments to you in your laughable thread as shown in the following links that make your topic embarrassing by not addressing them:
https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/6789/post-links/292928
https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/6789/post-links/293685
https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/6789/post-links/293847
RUN ETHAMG5, HURRY, RUN AWAY FROM YOUR JESUS INSPIRED POSTS ABOVE IN SHOWING THAT YOU ARE ONLY A PSEUDO-CHRISTIAN AT BEST! LOL!
As we can see, you went to Tradesecret’s school of “How to RUN AWAY from biblical axioms and to “try” and remain intelligent looking in the aftermath!” Priceless! You do the same old “routine” over and over and over because of your Bible stupidity to the point of ad nauseum.
As we can see, you went to Tradesecret’s school of “How to RUN AWAY from biblical axioms and to “try” and remain intelligent looking in the aftermath!” Priceless! You do the same old “routine” over and over and over because of your Bible stupidity to the point of ad nauseum.
-->
@ethang5
.
EtHAMg5, the Ham Cursed king of non sequiturs,
ETHAMG5 DIRECT QUOTE TO ME: “Why would I discuss Christian religion with a fake Christian who has admitted he doesn't follow Jesus?”
In part, you posted a topic of the Christian religion in your pitiful post #42 that you specifically stated in your quote above that you will not discuss with me anymore, obviously to save me from Bible Slapping you Silly®️ AGAIN. Therefore, under your new rules towards me, I am just following your pleading crybaby sniffling request in your quote above to not discuss your post #42 regarding the Christian religion, understood? BUT, now I will post questions to you through the membership that you are to answer for them instead of me, bypassing direct contact to you as requested, understood? Probably not. :(
Furthermore, in you still addressing me in wanting to discuss the Christian religion after your whimpering little boy runaway request pertaining to your quote above in saying that you will not, you therefore are turning into a HYPOCRITE which Jesus hates: “But Jesus, aware of their malice, said, “Why put me to the test, you hypocrites? (Matthew 22:18)
Therefore, as if your complete Bible stupidity, having the dreadful Ham Curse because you are a black man, and you running away from biblical axioms 100% of the time isn’t enough, now you have turned into an ungodly HYPOCRITE in front of Jesus and the membership!!! (Hebrews 4:13) Your Bible stupidity is without bounds! LOL!
NEXT BIBLE FOOL THAT WANTS TO BE EASILY BIBLE SLAPPED BY ME LIKE ETHAMG5 HAS BEEN IN THE LAST 3 POSTS OF MINE WILL BE … ?
-->
@zedvictor4
The Earths geology varies greatly relative to time.
You don't say.
It's no good advocating the "science" that agrees with your biblical commitments, but then denying the science that doesn't agree.
What science have I denied? Your assumed date for the flood is not science.
That just makes you appear to be "cherry picking".Which is what you are doing. Mr E.
"That" is your assumption, not what I'm doing. Your bias makes you not able to differentiate.
-->
@Ramshutu
Yes - so science agrees with the Bible - except of course for all the cases where it doesn’t
Are those cases secret? Cause you've offered none.
And yet you are here....
Wow. There can be no other reason huh, slick?
I wasn’t able to find more than the single study after a brief search...
Well that certainly proves there is only one.
So the first is theoretical - the second is rank speculation.
I'm not using the leftist method of validating only what I already believe.
Like I said - to get the water out from where it is,..
Dude, a short while ago, you didn't even know there was water there and were claiming there was not enough water. Now you're an expert? The fact remains. The Earth does have enough water. The mechanical logistics is another matter.
The Bible makes all sorts of claims we can invalidate -
We who? You mean the "experts" you have faith in?
...but there are some where it’s able to by right by accident. Like this one
Lol. You say, "by accident", and that is speculation. But that is fine by me. You admit the Bible was correct WHEN NOBODY ELSE KNEW, not even scientists.
Yet you are here sounding like you found the bible version of the higgs boson.
I only sound that way to you because you are terrified of any science that validates any biblical story.
More scientific revelations will come validating the Bible. The more we learn, the more we learn.
-->
@BrotherDThomas
Hey village idiot,
I knew you'd run. Not to worry, no one takes you seriously anyway.
But even your moron hindu pal knows you confessed your disobedience to your Lord. Funny that your beliefs are closer to a loony Hindu than to the Bible.
Can the class say, pseudo-christian?
I thought it could.
Are those cases secret? Cause you've offered none.
“It all agrees with The Bible”
We who? You mean the "experts" you have faith in?
“It disagrees with the Bible? It must be these phoney experts.“
Cherry.
Picking.
But I can go further.
We know there wasn’t a global flood
We know animals weren’t specially created
We know that animals cannot all be traced back to small founder groups.
We know that the earth came into existence
after the sun and the stars.
We know sea creatures existed before trees.
So on the one hand; the Bible makes some Huge and incontrovertible errors that are clearly utterly false.
On the other hand, science seems to show that there is water in the mantle; with a volume low bound That is completely insufficient to cover land; and a high bound possibly sufficient; and despite there being no physical way it could come out without destroying the planet, and no way to get rid of it in 130 days; your thumping your chest about it. This is ridiculous.
The Bible didn’t predict that the mantle contained vast quantities of water - it didn’t even predict a mantle. It just had a story that we know isn’t true, that claimed the earth was submerged in water which we know it wasn’t - that eradicated almost all life, which we know didn’t occur and now we know that it’s possible there’s enough water locked away in a location that can’t produce floods, or make it to the surface, or return in any great quantities quickly; there’s one tiny aspect that is consistent - with everything else disproving it.
The blindness to all other contradictory evidence - is cherry picking.
-->
@Ramshutu
Are those cases secret? Cause you've offered none.
“It all agrees with The Bible”
We who? You mean the "experts" you have faith in?
“It disagrees with the Bible? It must be these phoney experts.“
It's easy to "win" arguments when you insert your own lies for your opponent's arguments isn't it? I prefer challenges.
We know there wasn’t a global floodWe know animals weren’t specially createdWe know that animals cannot all be traced back to small founder groups.We know that the earth came into existenceafter the sun and the stars.We know sea creatures existed before treesSo on the one hand; the Bible makes some Huge and incontrovertible errors that are clearly utterly false.
Sigh. The liberal once again conflates his posting an opinion for factual evidence. Some of the things you claim above are not even biblical. You don't know the Bible well enough to oppose it.
The Bible didn’t predict that the mantle contained vast quantities of water - it didn’t even predict a mantle.
If the Bible said water poured out of the Earth enough to add to a global flood, would it not have to know there was water in the Earth?
Why would the author add this bit of counter-intuitive information?
Science works with one finding at a time. Here is an example. The planet Uranus appeared to go off orbit. Scientists did not know why.
But the data was not thrown out because the reason for the discrepancy was not known. Later, it became apparent that "something" massive must be pulling Uranus out of orbit. Though no one knew of or had seen Neptune, scientist theorized that there must be a planet outside the orbit of Uranus. They predicted Neptune existence from how Uranus was behaving BEFORE anyone knew of a Neptune.
We do not yet know the mechanism for how the water came to the surface, but that doesn't nullify the truth that the water exists. Just as Neptune was found later, the water mystery will be found out too. Everything is not explained at once. Science finds out a bit at a time.
But the atheist, terrified that God may be slipping in, wants everything explained right now, or else proclaims the whole thing untrue.
Here is what you cannot deny. There is enough water on Earth to supply a global flood like the one put forth in Genesis.
Here is what has been taken away from you. The claim that rain alone could not produce enough water in the specified time to cover the Earth as it says in Genesis. Gone. You can no longer use that clunker.
The claim that there is not enough water on Earth to supply Noah's flood. Gone. You can no longer use that clunker.
Since you're just listing your opinions, I'll list some of mine too.
You were wrong in the date you thought the Bible offered for the flood.
You were wrong in thinking the Bible says the Earth came into existence before the sun and stars.
You were wrong in thinking the Bible says that sea creatures existed before trees.
Here are just a few things the Bible got right long before science confirmed them.
*Early Earth had one giant land mass.
*It did not rain on Earth for a long time after it reached life sustaining temperatures.
*The first life was in the sea
*Plants preceded animals. Fishes preceded amphebians. Reptiles preceded mammals. Man came last.
*The sun existed long before it became luminescent.
For a book not trying to explain science, the Bible is astounding. It's no wonder no other book can come close to equalling the Bible's effect on human history.
-->
@ethang5
HaHa.
You've cherry picked my previous post and dodged the important bits.
And your bias doesn't make you unable to differentiate?....LOL
-->
@zedvictor4
You made a post with "important bits"??
What's your definition of important? You make flippant, snarky posts, and then chaff when you are treated flippantly.
You only reap what you sow Z-man.
Our exchanges are usually tit for tat goading, interspersed with comment relative to the thread.
We're as good or as bad as each other in that respect.
Nonetheless, in said thread....And relative to your uncertainty regarding when such a biblical flood might have occurred.
I made pertinent references to how the geological time line and that of human evolution were unlikely to coincide at a point whereby the Earth might be entirely covered with water.....That is to say, before the formation of the continents and certainly before the development of homo-sapiens and the development of most of the creatures we see today.
You are clearly cherry picking unrelatable bits of scientific evidence, in order to overcome the improbability of an indeterminate biblical flood.
Now...... A certain amount of responsive goading is expected....But try not to avoid the above pertinent questioning this time.
-->
@zedvictor4
Our exchanges are usually tit for tat goading,...
I ask and you don't answer. Goading you to do what?
...interspersed with comment relative to the thread.
Of the two of us, you almost always are the first one to respond to my comments in threads.
We're as good or as bad as each other in that respect.
I disagree. But of course, no one is ever as bad as a liberal, to the liberal.
Nonetheless, in said thread....And relative to your uncertainty regarding when such a biblical flood might have occurred.
Please don't be dishonest. First, I corrected the poster that the flood was longer ago than 6,000 years. That shows certainty, not uncertainty.
No one has exact dates for events that happened thousands of years ago, not even your priest evolutionists. Don't be disingeneous.
I made pertinent references to how the geological time line and that of human evolution were unlikely to coincide at a point whereby the Earth might be entirely covered with water.....That is to say, before the formation of the continents and certainly before the development of homo-sapiens and the development of most of the creatures we see today.
That is if we pre-assume your narrative, which is what liberals do. They pretend their worldview is the correct one and expect everyone else to believe so too, and act incredulous when others don't take their narrative as a given.
There is no "time-line" for evolution or a global flood. You know this, your attempt here is pure pre-emptive fabrication.
You are clearly cherry picking unrelatable bits of scientific evidence, in order to overcome the improbability of an indeterminate biblical flood.
I am not now trying to prove a global flood. I have proven what the thread set out to do, proven that there is enough water on Earth for a global flood.
You want to now move to a global flood because you have lost on the thread's title topic.
Now...... A certain amount of responsive goading is expected
You call my answers goading because you never answer, and need an excuse for why you don't.
The total amount of water on Earth is less than a quarter of what would be required to cover the entire planet. This claim may seem unrealistic until one realizes that Earth is actually quite water poor. Although 71 percent of the planet’s surface is covered by oceans, only about 0.1 percent of Earth’s volume is water. According to the U.S. Geological Survey, the volume of all the water on Earth, including salt and fresh water, icecaps, groundwater, and atmospheric water, amounts to 332,500,000 cubic miles. Earth’s average radius is 3,959 miles. The volume of a sphere is given by the formula 4/3πr3 where r is the sphere’s radius. Earth’s volume is then about 259,900,000,000 cubic miles. The volume of atmospheric water is a little over 3,000 cubic miles, negligible in this calculation. A sphere containing all of Earth’s water would be about 860 miles in diameter, approximately the distance between Salt Lake City, Utah, and Topeka, Kansas. Or suppose Earth’s surface was completely smooth and all of Earth’s water was in a spherical shell covering the planet’s surface. That shell would be approximately 1.7 miles thick. So, is this enough to cover the Earth’s mountainous terrain?
Mount Everest, the highest mountain on Earth, is 29,029 feet (or about 5.5 miles) above sea level. The average elevation of all the continental landmasses is 2,755 feet (about 0.52 miles).1 From this information, we can make a first-order approximation that the volume of water needed to cover Mount Everest, including all the water presently on Earth, is about 1,400,000,000 cubic miles. Therefore, the volume of water currently on Earth is only about 24 percent of the volume needed to cover Mount Everest.
Mount Everest, the highest mountain on Earth, is 29,029 feet (or about 5.5 miles) above sea level. The average elevation of all the continental landmasses is 2,755 feet (about 0.52 miles).1 From this information, we can make a first-order approximation that the volume of water needed to cover Mount Everest, including all the water presently on Earth, is about 1,400,000,000 cubic miles. Therefore, the volume of water currently on Earth is only about 24 percent of the volume needed to cover Mount Everest.
-->
@ethang5
It's easy to "win" arguments when you insert your own lies for your opponent's arguments isn't it? I prefer challenges.
That’s one part of it: what you’re doing is systematically ignoring with all the science that Disagrees with you.
You’re hand waving, dismissing, flat out ignoring, deflecting; everything but explain how all this disparate science - such as palaeontology, evolution, geology and Astrophysics - all contradicts the biblical narrative doesn’t actually contradict it.
This is how you’re cherry picking. It all disagrees with you simply protest that it does not.
Sigh. The liberal once again conflates his posting an opinion for factual evidence. Some of the things you claim above are not even biblical. You don't know the Bible well enough to oppose it
This is an angry assertion - not an argument.
The bible states the earth was created in 7 days. It was not.
The bible states that the trees, fruits, seeds, and a variety of plant life, land and sea was created on the third day.
The bible also states on the fourth day that the lights in the sky, including sun moon and stars were created on the fourth day.
The bible also states that on the fifth day animals, fish, etc were all created.
None of these happened in a day, these things cannot have been specially created, and all the elements are completely out of order and all happened a disparate times. Science disproves this creation story.
The chronology of the flood is based on two things: modern humans have only existed in societies for a few tens of thousand years; and there is no evidence of any meaningful civilization prior much before that. We have evidence of habitation, but no point in time at which there was any massive flood of any kind in the few hundred thousands years of hominids.
This makes the maximum time of the flood a few thousand years, and minimum of 5-6000.
Of course, there’s no evidence of a global flood at any point in geological history at all; so really the objection is barely an objection
The second aspect is biblical lineages which describe descendants of Noah down; with around 10 generations between Noah and the Abraham who is historically placeable to ~4000 years ago.
Of Course we know the flood didn’t happen at any time : but as you fixated on this point, it’s largely irrelevant.
The critical issue though, is that o on the one hand; the Bible makes some Huge and incontrovertible errors that are clearly utterly false.
On the other hand, science seems to show that there is water in the mantle; with a volume low bound That is completely insufficient to cover land; and a high bound possibly sufficient; and despite there being no physical way it could come out without destroying the planet, and no way to get rid of it in 130 dayson the one hand.
This is the issue you seem to ignore; it’s still impossible that the water can get out: the physics of how water comes out of magma is well known and understood - the magma has to reach the surface and depressurize allowing the water to flash to steam with the remaining contained glasses; which would have to happen on a scale so substantial that to occur in 40 days across a large fraction of the earth would both be visible In the geological record (which it is not), and so cataclysmic with so much magma it would destroy the plant.
The reality here is that the biblical account is still just as impossible as it was; you have just traded one impossibility for another.
Or specifically; before there was no evidence that enough water is present to cover the earth (note: the lower bound estimate of how much water there is, is still too low to cover the planet - a point you ignore). Now there *may* be enough water present.
However; if is physically impossible for that water to escape into the planet - or return in a few years - because of basic principles of physics.
In fact, it hasn’t validated the bible - it actually makes it more unlikely for the reasons above.
-->
@ethang5
There are just some minor issues:
Assuming you just need to double the amount of ocean water to cover the earth , you need some mechanism by which 10,000,000,000 cubic miles of magma can move from 400miles below the earth to the surface to de-gas 310,000,000 cubic miles of water (volume of our oceans) in the form of steam assuming 3% water content by volume.
This would, of course, be a total of 510,000,000,000 cubic miles of steam at a temperature of upwards of 400 degrees.
Or, to put that in perspective, earths atmosphere has a volume of 20,600,000,000 cubic miles; so each day of the 40 days, magma degasses 12 billion cubic miles of 400 degree steam - about half the total volume of the earths atmosphere in superheated steam each day... (assuming only water, and no gas, sulphides or particulates are released)
Assuming - somehow - that is not an issue; you have to turn it to water.
When steam condenses, it releases 2.26kj of energy per gram.
310 million cubic miles of water is approximately
1,292,136,371,348,135,000,000,000 grams
Let’s 1.29 x 10^24 grams - or 2.9x10^24 kJ of energy released by all that steam turning to water.
Or as a more manageable number: 693,116,634,799 megatons over the 40 days.
Per square km of earths surface (510 million square km), that works out as 1,359 megatons for every square kilometre of earth surface.
Or 33.94 megatons per square kilometre per day..
Then there’s losing that heat....
To radiate that amount of heat the earth has to lose 2.899999999999016e+27 joules of heat at over at most 120 days - of 11,232,000 seconds; or 2.581908831908e20 watts or 258,190,883 Terrawatts.
We receive a total of 175,000 Terrawatts from the sun....
The sun puts our 3.8x10^26 watts.... so the earth would need to put our 1/100000 of the energy of the sun to get rid of the heat.
So the earth has to put out 1400 times the power we receive from the sun in order to get rid of all that steam condensation heat.
-->
@Ramshutu
All that DOES sound daunting, until you realize that god can do it no problem through his magic, soooooo....science agrees and therefore argument over.
And don't you dare ask why if he can do it with his powers, he needed to hide something that's not exactly water in magma so he can use it. The answer is...he does work in mysterious ways!