Be careful with that third significant figure. There was a new measurement published for the decay scheme of K-40 in the past few weeks that leads to a small change in K-40 dates.
1 Like
Sounds like the kind of thing that young earthists would pounce on to claim that radiometric dating is “unreliable” and that “scientists are always changing their minds.” As if errors of just 0.02% somehow justified claims that the final figures must be out by a factor of a million.
In the Real World, of course, measurement does not work like that. Nor does anything else for that matter.
6 Likes
nah energy is not an issue in any way. I would suggest that you study thermic activity and how clouds are formed. The mere fact we are talking about water is exactly why the energy claim is not even remotely an issue…we are talking an energy cycle, not single-use explosions (these are not hand grenades…which are single use) water cools when it forms cloud and then rains…and it does this very quickly. we cannot create energy from nowhere…its already contained right here and is constantly being cycled. you are stuck with this thinking that its all a single explosion…i am not of that view.
We also know that studies have found the likelihood that far more water is found underground than above. reference here Earth May Have Massive Subterranean Water Reservoir, Bigger Than All Our Oceans - The Atlantic
-
according to research leader Graham Pearson, he and his team discovered a rare mineral that suggests a reservoir may exist 250-375 miles beneath the Earth’s surface, below the crust. Pearson explains that his team analyzed a tiny diamond found in Brazil in 2008, and found a microscopic mineral crystal, ringwoodite, that contains roughly one percent water by weight. The discovery indicates that more water can be found throughout the transition zone — the portion of the Earth’s mantle where the diamond originated.
-
Pearson says that “this sample really provides extremely strong confirmation that there are local wet spots deep in the Earth in this area.” Scientists speculate on where the water, if it’s there, came from.
-
Two theories prevail: The reservoir is filled with ocean water carried underground by shifting tectonic plates, or that the water has been present since the Earth formed,
Why are you stuck with this idea that I said anything about a single explosion? I described the energy needed to be extracted from the Earth in order to achieve the final result of orbiting asteroids. You cannot get that from an energy cycle on Earth because the energy ends up in the asteroids, not on the Earth.
You appear to have no understanding of the scale of energy actually needed. You have also made zero effort at creating anything like a realistic mechanistic model, which would involve far greater difficulties than the simple energy demands I mentioned, but the latter alone are enough to rule out the idea. You asked for input about this idea from educated people here. I have a PhD in physics. From the standpoint of physics, this scenario is utterly insane.
If you didn’t want to hear the answer, why did you ask the question?
5 Likes
No one is suggesting there is liquid water deposits in the deep rocks of the earth, only that the rocks have water within their matrix. I don’t think that there is any theory that there are reservoirs of ocean water carried by tectonic plates, but would welcome any references if I am wrong.
2 Likes
You keep repeating this as if it would make a difference. It does not. You have the same heat problem either way.
Until you can do this, and show your work, all your chatter about cooling and rain is worthless.
2 Likes
because your claims are based on the amount of energy needed to launch the entirety of the asteroid belt into space. Do you not see the problem with your quoted calculation there… that is ridiculous and not what is being claimed by this theory
Again, the energy needed as a result of steam explosions would never cause the vaporization in the Biblical flood model because of the fact water cools, forms clouds, saturates the cloud, and when energy is reduced further, falls as rain. The fountains of the deep can continue this cycle so long as there is energy being radiated from the earth’s core (which even your worldview claims is nuclear!).
Also,
In sticking with the “it would vaporize the earth” statement, one is stupidly attempting to claim the creation of energy and matter …the energy is already here, no new energy is being created and as such it can’t vaporize the earth! BTW, energy is being lost to space actually not the other way around (as it appears this vaporization garbage proposes)
The key to all of this is water and that is the entire point…anything else would not be able to achieve this kind of activity in a sustainable manner such that vast quantities of matter could be ejected into the atmosphere and possibly beyond.
Now look, I don’t see this as a salvation issue in and of itself…but in the bigger theological understanding of the Bible, it does support a literal creation and literal flood event and this is the point… it’s about the evidence that closely follows self-evident Bible understanding…the Bible explains itself, so we need to search for physical evidence that stays in harmony with self revealing bible themes!
When i read in Genesis “Day X God said let there be…” YEC don’t need to attempt to interpret anything…the words interpret themselves.
People who try to say “no it doesn’t mean that”…these people are ignoring literary recordings of historical facts as given to Moses in person by God.
It is absurd to think that God stood in front of Moses and lied to his face and God’s own son Christ furthered that lie during his ministry, then the Apostle Paul spun some more 30 years later. Sorry, but the Biblical evidence throughout 66 books overwhelmingly supports a literal reading of the flood account. So that means we simply have to find the evidence that aligns with the Biblical account (instead of trying to rewrite the Bible to support secular evolutionary interpretations and theories). Hence my claim that SAtan has also corrupted the geological record and its interpretation. We look at it through the corruption of sin and as sinners.
Adam, the discussion is pointless without a complete model (fixed in text) that includes measurements and all the pertinant details about structures, materials, densities, fissures, volumes, everything. Plus diagrams. Otherwise, it’s just shape-shifting.
2 Likes
Kendel, we disagree on theology, however, I honestly believe you to be intelligent, a person seeking Gods leading and i do genuinely value your contribution. What you say above might seem like a reasonable point, however its nothing more than a copout… truly!
The requirement is not on me to produce any calculations…the Bible (Gods word yes?) says exactly how the flood event happened. You either have enough faith to believe Gods word, or you deny it and give up Christianity!
The choice really is that binary…you cannot simply sit on the fence and make the claim “God didnt. give Moses the scientific details of exactly how much energy was required and where it came from…”
To return your point more directly, let me return fire with this…
prove to me that Christ ascended into heaven and the gospel is really true. Show me the scientific evidence…those re-testable experiments and therefore facts, that you know support your belief here.
- As far as I know, the only facts we have are the apparent first-hand eyewitnesses who blindly followed a cult leader …the disciples! Are you really sure that is enough to support your faith without actual scientific evidence of Christ’s ascension?
*I know im sounding atheistic in the above…however the intent is to force the reality of the dilemma Christians face when science is brought into the salvation issue. Corrupted humanistic observations, and theories of apparent facts ignore sin and the corruption of sin in the entire world and everything around us.
We look at our reality through the glasses of sin and attempt to claim God is restricted to such observations…that is theological nonsense! Proof of that being nonsense are found in the idea that Christ is divine in the first place, turned water into wine, sent demons into a herd of pigs, and raised Lazurus from the dead!*
It is you talking about rain and cooling. The flood is out of your depth.
11 In the six hundredth year of Noah’s life, on the seventeenth day of the second month—on that day all the springs of the great deep burst forth, and the floodgates of the heavens were opened. 12 And rain fell on the earth forty days and forty nights.
I’m missing the part about the asteroid belt being ejected from Earth into space. Why is that again?
By Piet Hein:
As Pastor X steps out of bed
he slips a neat disguise on:
that halo round his priestly head
is really his horizon.
1 Like
Ron instead of messing around with statements of apparent naivety, go back and read the original O.P.
Let me put the equation of the possibility of rocks being ejecgted into space in a much more comical way…
- Before reading my comical story, i ask that you first do a google search showing images of the earth’s atmosphere taken from space. Look at the ratio of the sheer size of the earth to its own atmosphere. The distance we are talking about is minuscule by comparison.
Now whilst you have that Google Earth image in front of you…imagine the following…
- If one was to scale up the average human bum to the size of the earth, and then that human farted and lit the fart with a cigarette lighter (one of the dormitory nonsense games us surfer boys used to get up to at one point in my university days)…how far do you think that flame would go into space? Would your bum vaporise given mine is still very much intact?
The idea that the energy required to launch enough material into space to form the asteroid belt i dont think stands the stink test. It ignores two things:
- The scale of the earth to it atmosphere (see human fart illustration above)
- Water when heated rises, cools, and falls again…and it does this very efficiently and quickly and that cycle is repetable over and over again. Given it rained for a long time in the flood event, i put it that this is one of the most likely scientific reasons as to why it rained enough to flood the earth!
I want to make it clear, I cannot make the claim this could account for every possible comet or asteroid in the universe…what if there are unfathomable quantities of these objects in space we dont know about?
The above would raise the theological question, why would God create killer objects in space?
Did God predestine before Adam and Eve sinned that he might need them scientifically to destroy Sodom and Gomorrah, or to consume Elijah’s sacrifice after 3.5 years of drought, or to cast Satan into the lake of fire and then destroy the earth before remaking it Revelation 20 and 21?
I don’t know why you are fixated on the size of the atmosphere. It isn’t the reason things don’t fly out into space. It is the gravity well, or the force of gravity from that “sheer size of the earth” that has to be overcome in order to leave earth orbit. The atmosphere does add another problem which you haven’t mentioned which is the loss of velocity due to friction as the rocks pass through the atmosphere.
Why would God create hurricanes?
Why would God create earth quakes?
Why would God create lightning?
Why would God continue to create floods?
Etc, etc.
1 Like
Words fail me.
2 Likes
Edgar. Your initial proposal and subsequent posts are preposterous. I’m surprised the BioLogos moderators let you get this far.
2 Likes
Your OP states:
and this:
You set up the question in relation to scientific posibility, and you have repeatedly made claims attempting to rely on basic physics and speculative geology. You have repeatedly made references to a model you have in mind, but have not provided a complete description of it, so it seems to morph and change to suit some purpose that is not scientific.
If you want to have a discussion about scientific possibility, then do that. But that requires a detailed, accurate model, which includes the things I mentioned before. That’s how scientific discussions work. If you aren’t interested in providing that information, then you are having a different kind of discussion.
The real discussion that keeps surfacing is one of your biblical interpretation and your theology. The incomplete description you provide of Earth’s geology and geological processes is as speculative as any other attempt to incorporate the incompatable ancient, unrealistic concepts of them with contemporary real observations. Yet you treat it as the correct understanding, The Christian Understanding.
So you attempt to make geology a salvation issue.
Jesus didn’t mention geology as a requirement for entrance into the Kingdom of God.
6 Likes
I concur here. This conversation is just going round and round in circles. Adam has been told what he needs to be doing in order to establish any sort of scientific credibility for his model, but he is repeatedly refusing to do so, instead preferring to rely on invalid analogies that are plumbing ever new depths of absurdity, and long accusatory sermons in which he trots out Bible passages that may be of value in their own right but that have little or no relevance whatsoever to the subject matter at hand.
It would also be good if we could get some feedback from the moderators on his repeated accusations against the rest of us of not being Christians, for no reason whatsoever other than our insistence that he substantiate his claims by doing the maths.
5 Likes
This is just me (as one of the moderators) talking - I don’t represent all the others, much less Biologos itself. My own way of thinking about this might be characterized as the “Mount Carmel” approach where Elijah instructs all the prophets of Baal to put as much dry tinder as they want on their own altar, and then in contrast tells them to drown his with water - all of which serves to make the eventual victory all the more glorious.
So in that vein, I (and I suspect other moderators too) try to be generous in giving opponents and challengers to Biologos views ample and repeated opportunity to try to give answer and make their case (which coincidentally then also necessitates defenders of science and truth to also put gems of truth on repeated display then as well) as a way of showcasing for all present and future lurkers and readers which side takes reality and scriptures into account and which side is forced to ignore so much of reality and scriptural imperative toward truth.
Yeah - not being a fan of violence, Elijah slaughtering 400 prophets isn’t my favorite part of the story, but then again, that’s not what that story is about and it makes a larger point. One that I think is relived in real and present time here. I suppose the merciful thing is to bring this thread to a close as you suggest - since as you say, all the relevant points have been made multiple times by now.
5 Likes