[ Young Earth ] Noah's Flood

[Arch Angle]

great questions sparrow.

Can they measure the uplift?

Did the river cutit? or did a fast moving drainage do it?

Yeah, this massive sedimentary deposit. wonder how they got there? this massive body of sediment would leavessigns all over the place I would think, but i don't know.

massive drainage of a large body of water? Do we have any examples wherequick drainage of water left this type of mark? If the water drained that fast, it would seemwe would see more features like this everywhere. Unless it all drained in one spot I guess.

the water drained? where to? I wonder if there is a large body of waterunder the rock drain hole?

 

[Sparkey]

great questions sparrow.

Can they measure the uplift?

Did the river cutit? or did a fast moving drainage do it?

Yeah, this massive sedimentary deposit. wonder how they got there? this massive body of sediment would leavessigns all over the place I would think, but i don't know.

massive drainage of a large body of water? Do we have any examples wherequick drainage of water left this type of mark? If the water drained that fast, it would seemwe would see more features like this everywhere. Unless it all drained in one spot I guess.

the water drained? where to? I wonder if there is a large body of waterunder the rock drain hole?

I know cupid dave loves geology but it's difficult to get him to post stuff that stays course... I meander more than he does though. My sophomore class in Geology doesn't give me the good stuff, but I do have links. Here's one. It's from a pro YEC site that would have gotten me a poor grade had I quoted it, but it's chuck full of good stuff.

River Meanders - Young Earth vs. Old Earth Evolution fairytale forum. Pardon the rigidity of the thought in the title there, I know you respect Science. I do too, by the way. To me, God is literally pouring out knowledge (if such a thing is possible) upon the whole earth.

 

[Sparkey]

or did a fast moving drainage do it

If something was stopped up (trapped) and then explosively discharged there would be some mighty cutting going on. Think about a dam where water is trapped and then let loose. The energy of that water lets it cut and carry a whole lot of sediment and debris where it is released. Further down stream the deposits are placed. Unless there was an abrupt halt (like another dam) we would expect to see loosely sorted sediments being layered as the river gradually "settled down" and the load was dropped according to weight and load capacity.

Did you see that video that was posted earlier in thread? Post #42. That was new to me. In the past I've thought about water laden or ice asteroids (no wait, small planets, actually) approaching the earth or orbiting the earth for the mechanical process of mountain building and water dynamics before they exploded. Not sure how to weigh the difference between the theories (except NASA has been looking for water in space even in tiny amounts - as a possible fuel source and hasn't found any, or if they did, only trace amounts) but both theories attempt to explain how something as great as this may have formed in a relatively short period of time. The book that I mention for the alternate theory about the orbit of an ice planet includes things like the Roche Limit (The Roche limit sometimes referred to as the Roche radius, is the distance within which a celestial body, held together only by its own gravity, will disintegrate) and other neat scientific thought and was written by a Hydrologist, called, "The Biblical Flood and the Ice Epoch", by Donald W. Patten and downloadable online from Creationism.org. Pardon me if I misquoted the author's credentials, I read it back in the early 70's and then loaned it to a brother who has cherished it, but has not yet returned it.... lol

 

[Arch Angle]

the fact they said old earth fairytale means I aint interested. They willbe aligned with the atheist claim to 'fairy tales". neither will know me

I will see them on the battle field.

ook at Montana for rapid movement of large amounts of water. also, look in your front yard after a strong rain storm.

look at dried up river beds in areas with wet and dry seasons. I don't see fast moving water making those types of turns. Usually turns like that need time. I think.
God shows us every day how he works. to me anyway.

 

[Arch Angle]

also,

nasa has been looking for water and not found it?

err, check your information on that, or smack me silly for misreading again. water is everywhere. You might mean they cant find it in certain locations that wecan use it.

 

[Sparkey]

also,

nasa has been looking for water and not found it?

err, check your information on that, or smack me silly for misreading again. water is everywhere. You might mean they cant find it in certain locations that wecan use it.

Okay, thanks. You're right of course. I didn't spek wel thar. What I meant to say is that NASA has been looking for a possible source of water that would help solve the fuel dilemma that they face while considering future exploration of the universe. So they've been looking for close water and have not found any supply sufficient in size for that purpose. They used "Z-Spec" technology and a 33-foot (10-meter) telescope near the summit of Mauna Kea in Hawaii to discover "the water vapor spectrum of APM 08279+5255".

We hear of discoveries of water all the time. The one I mentioned above is the largest (so far) and 12 billion light-years away. It has more water than what is contained in the Milky Way. About 4,000 times more water vapor detected in the Quasar so far distant that we measure in terms of the speed of light and billions of years. I should have spoken my thought better, that's certain. Thanks for catching my error.

As far as errors within errors go, would this next quote also be mine? Would that make my mistake count increase by 2 or by the quantity [Error]² ?
Now, what if I am wrong about being wrong? Would that make it [Mistake QTY]³ (cubed)? I'm okay with that. It's happened before.

Dark, finger-like features appear and extend down some Martian slopes during late spring through summer, fade in winter, and return during the next spring. Repeated observations have tracked the seasonal changes in these recurring features on several steep slopes in the middle latitudes of Mars' southern hemisphere.

"The best explanation for these observations so far is the flow of briny water," said Alfred McEwen of the University of Arizona, Tucson. McEwen is the principal investigator for the orbiter's High Resolution Imaging Science Experiment (HiRISE) and lead author of a report about the recurring flows published in Thursday's edition of the journal Science.

Some aspects of the observations still puzzle researchers, but flows of liquid brine fit the features' characteristics better than alternate hypotheses. Saltiness lowers the freezing temperature of water.

From: NASA Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter

Sparrow says, "Thanks. I didn't know that."

 

[Sparkey]

the fact they said old earth fairytale means I aint interested.

The article is about river mechanics. I've already scanned it and think it is "safe" and isn't designed to provoke. I don't like that title either. It's way too close minded for my taste. I have not examined the site beyond that particular article, but do like it because of the Geologic perspective and a good source for considering the patterns of water flow. I can cut some of the pictures there and fetch them back if you're interested? No problem. Happy to halp a brotheh out. (Wish I knew how to spel in that slang sound, but nevermind... lol)

Here's what one guys says, "Okay. Time for an unnecessarily large image." (I've re-sized it)

He's talking about why water flows "crooked". It has a lot to do with stream dynamics. The flow starts straight but like a race-car driver will see the inside and outside of the channel as the easiest path. This results in cut-banks on one bank (soon to become the outside of a curve) and depositions called "point-bars" on the soon to be inside of channel curves.

His diagram taught me about the wave length (the distance between crests of two waves) and how it will determine the length of the curve overall. This does not factor "wave height" into it but that's another aspect that could be taken into consideration. When looking at a shoreline (and not a river) the depth of the wave is equal to ½ the wave length and determines where the wave "breaks" as it approaches the more shallow areas near the shoreline.

This next pic relates more to the Grand Canyon and communicates various principles considered in Geology. He states, "In the flood layers, all I've seen are fluid escape channels in heterogeneous layers that do have any cobbles present. These two facts should be a strong argument against any river channels being present."

Because there are no "cobbles" which are defined to be rocks or stones of a specific size, larger than "pebbles" and smaller than "boulders" he reasons that it was "escape" water and not a river that cut and laid the depositions. The author asks us to "Note the river channels in the redwall limestone. These cannot be river channels since no cobbles are present and the channels reappear in the same place in a higher strata. They are fluid escape channels from water being squeezed out of a hyper concentrated flow."

The number one factor to keep in mind is that a river's flow most easily affects its banks. The flow does affect the riverbed, but because anything removed will generally be replaced, there is rarely any significant change wrought by the action of a river on its bed.

I think of "cobbles" as fairly large but still able to be thrown one handed. One other aspect to consider is how well sorted the sediment is. If it is very well sorted, this speaks of a more gradual settling as distance is increased and force (energy) of the river is reduced. The smallest (most fine, or very small in size, weight, or thickness) particles are infused (think about water saturated with salt or sugar but change it so it doesn't "dissolve". I guess the best way is just to think about muddy waters). The larger grains are the heaviest and typically settle first. It all makes sense in our normal lives and experience. It causes a wonder in me when I see things that indicate that what happened isn't as expected. What we call "river deltas" form when there is a rapid change in the gradient of a river channel, for instance, if water flowed off of mountains and then entered into a valley. There is a distinct "V" shape in the channel and also seen in the fan shaped "delta" deposits. "U" shaped channels (oftentimes much larger) are more likely to be explained as having been carved by glaciers. I can "see" these things in my mind as I picture them. But these meanders in the Grand Canyon (and elsewhere) are perplexing indeed.

 

[Sparkey]

The secret life of water

Yep, my son and I have spoken of this. I've also spoken to Geologists about the various water bottles sold commercially. Pretty interesting stuff there too. The water blessing from speech brings out the skeptic in me but I'm not all that opposed to it, can't help but think about P.T. Barnum when I consider it though.

Here's a quick quote.

A [real] scientist would have checked to see if he got the same results if he didn’t know beforehand which water was clean. Emoto never bothered with even this most elementary double-check. He didn’t consult real scientists. Had he done so, they could have told him that these snowflake crystals, just like raindrops, form around a core of dust, so actually the cleaner water is less likely to form them. Their beauty varies with the temperature and conditions of formation, not with the purity of the water. The idea that snowflakes could show anything about differences in the "molecular structure" of water is incompatible with basic physics.

Harriet Hall, also known as the SkepDoc, is a retired physician who lives in Puyallup, Washington (near me and my old haunts, says Sparrow), and writes about alternative medicine and pseudoscience. This excerpt is from her sixth article so far in the SKEPTICAL INQUIRER. Her e-mail is harriet.hall@comcast.net.

Copyright The Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal (SCICOP) Nov/Dec 2007

Let me close by admitting that there are things that I do not understand and that it is perfectly fine to me for others to believe what I am stretched in my imagination to entertain. I know you're just talking about something that many speak about. That's okay too.

 

[Sparkey]

[video=youtube;7zkrJG4XUeo]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=7zkrJG4XUeo#![/video]

 

[stovebolts]

Do we have any examples wherequick drainage of water left this type of mark? If the water drained that fast, it would seemwe would see more features like this everywhere.

We have Mount St. Helens. I was actually in Spokane the day it erupted! We thought it was the end of the world as the ash cloud turned a beautiful day into night.



http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/wog/mount-st-helens

Canyon formation: According to many geologists, most canyons on Earth were formed as a result of slow erosion by rivers and other natural sources over time—great amounts of time. Contrary to this view, Mount St. Helens tells a different story. A small eruption in 1982 carved a canyon over 150 feet (46 m) deep in a single day!

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/cm/v6/n1/mt-st-helens

 

[Sparkey]

The whole of Geology may be summed up in a single statement.

"Fossils are found within sedimentary deposits on the top of Mt. Everest." Interesting, isn't it?

Those "sediments" had to have been transported by water. It's more than confounding when we realize that waters run downhill. Fossils of palm fronds that must have grown, thick and lush, in a tropical climate have been witnessed by me not far from where I live. Coal can not form without lush (plentiful) vegetation. I've seen and touched bituminous coal nearby. Now the question merely becomes this: Fast or slow? A year? or Billions of years. The long time period needed for today's processes are assumed by only one side of the discussion. That side disregards the unseen things, and in my opinion it does so selectively, according to what is a presupposed time-frame. I can't explain all the things that must be considered to reconcile the various apparent contradictions, who am I then to say one over another especially when I believe in the invisible One who said He did it.

One side says, "The rock that was once sea floor rose up over a period of about 30 million years, and brought all the fossils with it." They look to a theory of small movements over large time. Another says that the Lord had a hand in the judgment that swept over the earth and also promised that this would not happen again. May we sweep away the one and not the other? I appreciate the Promise and do not consider it to be separable from the Love which is God.

 

[JohnD]

I see this thread is over a year old. So I may be repeating what others have already said. If so, my apologies.

That the entire earth could be covered with water is fantastic. Many narrow minded folk would say it was incredible / impossible. Some of them are unbelievers (in God) and they pooh pooh the validity of the flood of Noah. Seashells embedded in the tops of the highest mountains to them only means they were ancient sea bottoms before upthrust into mountain peaks. Others are believers but also cannot grasp a global flood so they try to explain Noah's flood was a local even in Mesopotamia... kind of like the movie Evan Almighty. But when you factor in all the evidence the Bible teaches about the flood, and consider that the average level of land on the earth its below sea level... not to mention the water locked in the frozen poles of planet earth... it's not such an incredible thing after all. In fact, when you realize the earth was described in Genesis 1:6-8 a planet with a vapor canopy (five of the planets in our solar system have canopies to this very day) which collapsed during the 40 day 40 night rains.

Before that downpour there was no rain on the earth. A mist would rise up from the earth in the cool of the day.

Ancient civilizations all have a great flood legend. They vary due to the many generations of human interpolation... but they validate the flood itself... the actual eyewitness account we have in Genesis (as dictated to God's scribe Moses).

The Fossil record supports a sudden deluge. Fossils are flash formed (not over long periods of time) and the fossils of land and sea creatures litter every lay of water sediment... even in the tallest mountains.

Noah's ark was spotted regularly during overflights in world war 2...

The Institute for Creation Research has a vast amount of information about the Genesis flood in a library and museum that was once located in San Diego, Ca. I personally spent many hours there in the mid 1990's. In it they have a replica of the barge Noah built. The average size of the animals taken aboard is that of a sheep. Noah did not have to take every variation of species but every kind (wolves for example which would later produce every variety of dog and wolf there is). So the size of the ark was not a problem. The gist of the time spent aboard the ark was that the animals hibernated.

The subterranean vaults burst open revealing deeper ocean bottoms and the collapse of land masses over them as they gushed and the tectonic plates slide around and collided under the global weight of the water alone.

I am speaking in very general terms here as I am quite rusty on the subject. 15 years ago I could have documented every syllable.

I have a theory about an event after the flood but was a delayed result of the flood... that the lost continent of Atlantis is essentially south America. That the entire American continents (North, Central, and South) broke away from Africa and Europe. Atlantis was a population center at the time and some of the ancient central and south America dwellings were at one time accessible to the Africa and the Middle east before the break away. Europe and North America were not population centers then so the focus was on what we know today as Mayan and Aztec cities etc.

This happened in the lifetime of Peleg whose name means divided. And as the continent moved west it would appear to sink into the ocean as it went over the horizon.

As I said, just a theory.