Originally posted by AshleyD
I have a hard time 'battling' with someone who calls others, 'Hon/Hun.' I have a habit of calling other members that on here and it warms my heart
to see someone else do it. 
ill try and call you names if that helps ^_^ i usually reserve the sarcasm for people who say it is deffinatley
true not might be which is what you do lol
Anyways, yes: Raqueya theory = 'ice shield.' I am probably misspelling it which is why it is not showing up in Google searches. It's the
Hebrew word for 'firmament' in Genesis. So whatever the correct spelling of that is, is what to search for. Again, not sure how I feel about it and
haven't read anything from Hovind to know what his studies are on it but I know the raqueya theory does include an ice shield.
yeah its
comonly known as hovind magic ice theory, he makes a complete fudge of it
but someone did some calculations on it, the ice would have to be over 1000Km thick to survive 2000 years befor it all became water, this doesnt take
into account that the water would magnify the suns heat making the process faster or that the weight of the water bieng pulled down by earths gravity
would casue it to self destruct a lot faster either so you can probabily double that(at least) to 2000km of ice
this is more then enough to block all light and heat down here on good ole terra firmer meaning we would all have no use for eyes and would all freeze
to death as tempreatures down here would casue everything inlcuding air to liqufy
So, as you can see, there is no one temperature for space. The temperature that you read, about 40 K, is pretty cold for anything in the inner
Solar System. It is, however, about right for the extreme outer planets, and is close to the temperature of the surface of Pluto (which it reaches in
the same way as Mercury, by balancing heating by sunlight with re-emission back into space).
www.madsci.org...
remeber at this point we would recieve 0 solar radiation and the heat eminating from the earth would be as it is now absorbed long before it even came
close to the surface so we would actually be colder then pluto
Liquid oxygen has a density of 1.141 g/cm³ (1.141 kg/L) and is moderately cryogenic (freezing point: 50.5 K (−222.65 °C), boiling point:
90.188 K (−182.96 °C) at 101.325 kPa
en.wikipedia.org...
40K puts us 10.5k below liquid oxygens threshold for cryogenics, and were still going to be colder then 40k as even pluto recieves some solar
radiation
noah would have needed more then just a wooden ark to survive in a liquid oxygen enviroment even before the flood happened
this is before the ice and water starts falling through our atmosphere as the canopy collapses large blocks of ice would begin to burn up turning it
into super pressured steam casuing the water falling with it to also become steam super heating the atmosphere and boiling anything lucky enough to
survive the liquid oxygen cryogenics effect
the sudden and immediate temprature variance would create massive pressure in every cell of a living body causing every cell to explode a tiny split
second before whats left of all the exploding cells becomes super boiled
again a wooden ark with a bit of pitch on the sides really isnt going to suffice as the wood its self would explode and imeddiatley combust from the
heat even in a liquid saturated enviroment
suddenly this explenation requires you to refuse and deny every aspect of everything scientific including maths to not have massive and seriously
detremental effects for all life on earth
i think if evolution really was random so the big and wrong probability numbers thrown around by creationists for life on earth suddenly seem a whole
lot smaller then the chance of even 1 cell of noah his family the ark or all of the animals surviving intact
as for how badly hovind fudges it up ill leave it for thunderf00t who i borrowed the 1000km of ice calculation from ... thanks thunderf00t
Mountain tops: Absolutely. It would be impossible today with the elevation levels. What I'm thinking though is that earths' topography would
have had to have been different at the time of the flood and the Bible hints at this being the case. That's the extent of my understanding on it.
Although, some of you guys have pointed out the formation of mountains would have happened way before we believe the flood occurred.
as for
that ill let the geology answer that,
Age of Everest:
Everest was formed about 60 million years ago
and mountians spend a whole lot more time getting smaller then they do getting taller
so unless you move noahs flood back 60 million years ago you have an imense problem with the water required
but then you find the next tallest mountain from that time period and get the same problem and have to keep going back and further back
until the water we have in the sea and trapped by glaciation are enough to swamp everything, and by the time we hit that even evolutionists are saying
man in a form close to recognisable wasnt walking around
so there silly head
(see said id try and make me less likable lol)
[edit on 21/11/08 by noobfun]
[edit on 21/11/08 by noobfun]
