Assorted retorts from yahoo boards and elsewhere : 1) On Flood with AronRa Referring to Soroka and Nelson · Correspondence de / of / van Hans Georg Lundahl : 2) With Alan Whistler / Alan the Atheist on AronRa's Video
How Meteorology Disproves Noah's Flood
Where description links to:
Journal of Geological Education, 1983, v. 31, p. 139
I had not looked at this link before commenting, may do so in the following.
3:03 (referring, missed exact numbers) They examined rain as being an impossible source for water of Flood, since estimating water in Oceans at x million cubic kilometers covering all the highest mountains in water would require an additional y million cubic kilometers ... (from following it appears we were dealing with billions)
AronRa, are you aware that your source being from 1983 has already been answered on that account?
Perhaps not as normal rain being enough (I don't know any creationists today who refer to rain as sole main source of Flood water), but as to the requirements.
The thing is, a creationist today is generally saying that where the water went after the Flood is a matter of Oceans sinking and tectonic plates rising.
Meaning, Oceans before the Flood were more shallow and mountains before the Flood were less high.
In fact, in order for Noah to have any idea how many cubits over the highest mountains the water was at a given time, it need not have been maximal time, he would have needed to measure water depth about take off from where the Ark was built, and so he would have needed to build it on one of the highest mountains (knowing from "geography class" it was such) in order to be where he could measure the water depth. Of course, theoretically he could have built the Ark in the valley beside, then seen it float over the mountain, then know if the water line was ... 15 cubits? mid height of Ark? ... and he floated over the mountain, then the water was at least 15 cubits deep. But it would have been a lot safer if the Ark was built on the mountain itself.
Which means it can't have been as pointed a peak as Mount Everest, Mount Everest has to be post-Flood.
And this means it must have been lower, in other words, the FIRST parameter of requirements is disrupted for the paper you cite.
[Next about AronRa's dismissal of pre-Flood Earth being flatter in both mountain height and ocean depth]
"The Bible says otherwise."
Well, there were high mountains all over the earth, before the Flood, but then they were high by pre-Flood standards.
This means they don't need to have been anything close to Mt Everest height.
So, your refutation of the by now standard creationist view on this is not valid.
3:52 "Let's not forget that Noah is supposed to have landed on Mt Ararat which is over three miles high ..."
OK, peak is today 5 165 meter above sea level. Or 16,854 feet.
That is greater Ararat. Lesser Ararat is 3,896 m or 12,782 ft.
One thing, both are volcanic cones. This means that they could have reached their height during the Flood (after the verse about highest mountains), got cooled down by Flood waters, so Noah could land there.
AND even just after Flood, this need not have been the height above centre of the Earth they are today, it can be that the general ground did rise under them too, so they are higher now than when Noah landed there.
5:55 [After showing clip from heated argument with Eric Hovind, and I try to resolve the discrepancy he tried to foist on Eric in that clip]
- 1) Waters cover highest pre-Flood mountains to 15 cubits (last measure Noah took) and continue to rise.
- 2) Ararat forms under water, and as Flood water comes from all around the Earth it cools quicker than normal.
- 3) Waters start receding.
- 4) After five months Ararat starts to appear.
- 5) Both Ararat and Mount Everest, both Alps and Andes rise way higher after the Flood than at that moment, while at same time Oceans sink deeper than ever before.
Any specific problem with this one?
"60 Bible verses describing a flat Earth inside a dome"
I have no problem with the "inside a dome" part, since one can reasonably call sphere of fix stars a dome.
But as to "flat Earth" that is simply not true.
Any "circle" passage is as true if Earth is a globe.
Any 4 corners passage can refer to land part of the globe as opposed to water part.
Any pillars of Earth or roots of mountains passage can refer to crust in relation to mantle. I e, crust not just being flat over mantle, but having parts protruding down into it.
8:22 [He is speaking of a great rain volume, and of the precipitation releasing lots of energy:]
"The Oceans would boil and the Ark would burn"
Assuming the additional joules came in the form of temperature.
If instead they came in the form of turbulence, that would explain quite a lot about the turbulence of Flood, assuming this to be the source of most fossils we dig up. NOTE : a really wonderful thing is that the Ark was supposed to float, not navigate.
[In the following, he first deals with hydroplate theory, then with meteors from space]
8:48 "meaning it would have broken anyway even if the people of the Earth hadn't pissed of God"
God could have made a miracle preventing it, had they done better.
8:53 "so did He know in advance when He made people the first time, that He would be so disappointed with them, He would have to kill them all?"
Yes. God is omniscient.
9:41 "It would steam cook everthing before boiling it alive."
Depends on how far down and how hot it got.
Also, remember that a sudden release of anything through very narrow openings may cool it down quite a lot, that is the principle used in refrigerators - probably since Michael Faraday and Jacob Perkins.
9:47 "only other source is that it came from outer space"
My favourite version is actially that "waters above firmament" refer to Hydrogen molecules, "gates of heaven" refer to a magnetic field which in preflood times shielded off atmospheric Oxygen from supra-atmospheric Hydrogen and their opening to this magnetic field turning off so as to form Brown's gas. Each little spark of lightning then caused an explosion which turned Brown's gas to water at a very great height.
Note, the rain of forty days and forty nights depleted uppermost oxygen and lowermost hydrogen so that God made literally sure it could never happen again.
[And in all this he is following Soroka and Nelson]
12:07 I think the conclusion of Soroka and Nelson is flawed, because their initial calculation of requirements is flawed.
That crust was a lot flatter and smoother before than after Flood was simply not taken into account.
A combination of hydroplate + rain augmented by Brown's gas + a smoother, flatter crust would considerably change the issue.
On credits, now.
I note that a very high percent have Scandinavian herigate, at least first three groups*. Germans are next "over represented" group.
* There were only three groups.
- Some of them
- seem a bit cookish, witness one whom I notified of this reply via FB
- He's anonymised and said
- I'm not quite sure why you suddenly enter my private life with your nonsense. That's a bit rude. Are you desperate? You must be.
[and some more which I leave out]
- I answered
- Your private life?
We must be having different attitudes to FB, then.
[and some more which I leave out]
- He's anonymised and said
- The only thing you've gained is more proof of how you people operate, how you relentlessly invade other peoples life trying to indogtrinate your fantasies.
- So, he sponsored AronRa
- but he does not care if AronRa is refuted or gets even an attempt of refutation. I wonder how much money he wasted for sth which did not really interest him? But if I asked, he would call it an "invasion of his private life" no doubt.