1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Hydroplate Theory

Discussion in 'Creation vs. Evolution' started by church mouse guy, Jun 30, 2017.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. dad1

    dad1 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2016
    Messages:
    302
    Likes Received:
    12
    Good luck with that.

    You have provided no evidence for a same nature in the past and you cannot do so.

    If you or 'other geologists' really think that it had to be the flood that was when the continents flew apart, fine.

    You are welcome to your belief that all animal migrating across the earth was due to rafting or some ancient land bridges. You are welcome to think that the ark had millions of species of animals, rather than just the created kinds. You are welcome to think that all those animals and people getting off the ark had lots of fresh grown herbs to eat. You are welcome to claim for no apparent reason that almost all the flood water was from below rather than above. You are welcome to believe that almost all the fossil record and geologic column resulted from one year of the flood. You are welcome to think that the flood somehow caused man to live 1/10 of the years that he used to live. Etc etc.

    Remember that it does not fit the bible or scientific evidences though.
     
  2. church mouse guy

    church mouse guy Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 23, 2002
    Messages:
    13,760
    Likes Received:
    462
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I was lucky enough to visit the Ark Encounter in Kentucky last fall and I certainly never thought that the ark had millions of species of animals--that is totally your fabrication. And I have never made a statement about the fossil record and geologic column--that is totally your fabrication. And I never said anything about man living 1/10 the number of years that he used to--that is totally your fabrication.
     
  3. dad1

    dad1 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2016
    Messages:
    302
    Likes Received:
    12
    Actually you are wrong, many flood geology folks do think the record was a result of the flood. Here is an example

    "
    Fossil Succession and "Liquefaction"
    Although not clearly explained by Brown, fossils in each geologic period show a characteristic assemblage of organisms, which differ from those in preceding and succeeding periods, and conform to expected evolutionary patterns--a widely recognized phenomenon known as "fossil succession." For example, the previously discussed White Cliffs of Dover contain fossils typical of the Cretaceous period (certain corals, gastropods, ammonites, etc.), which differ from the fossils in periods above and below, and which change even within the period. Likewise, vascular plants first appear in the late Paleozoic, but many others do not arise until the early Mesozoic, and flowering plants not until the early Cretaceous. Many other examples could be cited.
    Brown claims that "liquefaction" during the Flood explains "fossil layering". However, it is not even clear how liquefaction could be very applicable to his model, let alone explain fossil succession. In geologic usage, liquefaction normally refers to damp, sandy rock or soil becoming fluid-like during earthquakes. In contrast, a large portion of fossils occur in shales, limestone, dolomite, ash beds, clay, and other sediment types which were clearly not produced by liquefaction. Also, since Brown claims that most sediments were eroded at hydroplate edges, the sediments would already be under water and unconsolidated, and thus not involve liquefaction."
    Walter Brown's Hydroplate Model Doesn't Hold Water


    Or..Henry Morris..

    " Most fossils can be attributed to the worldwide catastrophe of Noah’s Flood, in which countless creatures were killed and then rapidly buried, or to its residual effects..."

    Fossil Record | The Institute for Creation Research

    AS for man living not a thousand years anymore, but more like a century, (70 years or whatever) that is exactly what happened, a sudden decrease. So do you really want to deny many creation science folks attribute this to the flood also?

    As for species on the ark, you have only 2 choices, that they adapted/evolved after the flood into the millions of species we now have....or that they all were on the ark. (8.7 million according to this science article)

    https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/08/110823180459.htm

    I think it is safe to say that science will not agree that the millions of species on earth (and those now extinct)

    99 Percent Of The Earth's Species Are Extinct—But ...


    --All could have adapted/evolved from basic animal kinds on the ark in 4500 years!
     
  4. church mouse guy

    church mouse guy Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 23, 2002
    Messages:
    13,760
    Likes Received:
    462
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I said that I never commented on the fossil record and when it was deposited so how can I be wrong when I never posted on the topic?
     
  5. dad1

    dad1 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2016
    Messages:
    302
    Likes Received:
    12
    Well you better comment on it. Walt and Morris and others did. So when you defend the hydroplate theory, and claims the ice age was from the flood, and etc one assumes you have some inkling of the basic issues involved.

    So are you claiming the millions of species alive now and the millions extinct all either were on the ark of evolved from the animals that were in the last 4500 years? Be clear.

    I think you did claim the flood caused the separation of continents somehow, and the way animals got around the world was by rafting, so we do get your general position here.
     
  6. church mouse guy

    church mouse guy Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 23, 2002
    Messages:
    13,760
    Likes Received:
    462
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I merely said that logs must have jammed the waterways for years. Clearly that would be a boon for birds, for example. I also said that the Ice Age created many land bridges among the seven continents created at the time of the flood as Noah's lovely world was destroyed forever.

    I am not going to comment on the fossil record because it is not germane to plate tectonics and you are wrong to say that I did previously comment on the geologic column and the fossil record. I think you have me confused with other posters.
     
  7. dad1

    dad1 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2016
    Messages:
    302
    Likes Received:
    12
    The way animals appear in the world (fossilized) and living had to have some relation to how continents moved. After all, a continent has animals on it. The issue is not whether you commented or even are aware of the various implications of attributing things like the ice age and the fast move of land to a flood. The issue is what the evidence and bible say.

    It seems to be a weak position to try and attribute the kangaroos in Australia to rafting. The question arises, if they got there that way, why are they not also found elsewhere? Again, you have the problem of biology in this present world.

    You only have several thousand years to work with. It makes more sense to me that such changes in creatures, and movements of continents happened in a different nature. Likewise, for the 1000 year reign of Christ on earth, it also makes sense that a different nature will be here. Lions cannot evolve stomachs and systems to eat grass in a very short time. Nature is God's way of controlling life on earth. When things are very different that they are or could be now in this nature, all a different nature means is that God changes things.

    The only real question then is will God change life on earth, and did He do so in the past or not?

    I do not view nature and forces and laws as something God has to send trillions of pixies and angels to overcome. I view God as controlling nature.
     
  8. church mouse guy

    church mouse guy Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 23, 2002
    Messages:
    13,760
    Likes Received:
    462
    Faith:
    Baptist
    For the record, I have said about the standard geologic column that the Pleistocene epoch followed the Noachian Flood.
     
  9. dad1

    dad1 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2016
    Messages:
    302
    Likes Received:
    12
    Not sure what you are saying then, because the flood geology position as I have shown, is pretty clear.
     
  10. church mouse guy

    church mouse guy Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 23, 2002
    Messages:
    13,760
    Likes Received:
    462
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Except that you are quoting evolutionary geologists and I am quoting creationist geologists when I say that the Pleistocene epoch followed the Noachian Flood.
     
  11. dad1

    dad1 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2016
    Messages:
    302
    Likes Received:
    12
    [​IMG]



    So where did all the fossils from all the previous layers come from?
     
  12. church mouse guy

    church mouse guy Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 23, 2002
    Messages:
    13,760
    Likes Received:
    462
    Faith:
    Baptist
    The trouble with your chart, dad1, from this layman's point of view, is that it covers both time and layers and originates from Charles Lyell in 1833.

    According to Kurt Wise, a paleontologist, the violent upheavel of the opening of the fountains of the deep destroyed almost all of the pre-flood fossils. So the flood deposited the Cambrian explosion.
     
  13. dad1

    dad1 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2016
    Messages:
    302
    Likes Received:
    12
    So the flood caused the Cambrian fossils, as well as the ice age eh?

    Then we have every fossil in the world destroyed by the flood also? Tell me, If I took 60 fossils, and dunked them underwater for 1 year would I have any fossils at the end of that time?
     
  14. church mouse guy

    church mouse guy Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 23, 2002
    Messages:
    13,760
    Likes Received:
    462
    Faith:
    Baptist
    The fountains of the deep caused great upheaval and great pressure so that would not be the same as a long soak, would it?
     
  15. dad1

    dad1 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2016
    Messages:
    302
    Likes Received:
    12
    Any fountain is in one place. Several fountains are in several places. It seems hard to imagine hundreds of millions of fountains destroying every fossil on earth.

    As for the water from below, that used to water the earth, rather than rain. It didn't seem to upheave Eden very much. I can see a lot of pressure being released suddenly in some areas. Perhaps the craters like in Yucatan may be remnants of such founts. But to claim all fossils on the planet were destroyed by this is beyond reason.
     
  16. church mouse guy

    church mouse guy Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 23, 2002
    Messages:
    13,760
    Likes Received:
    462
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I don't understand why it is beyond reason if the seams of the one continent that covered most of the earth except for inland seas in the time between Adam and Noah was ripped apart by columns of water shooting tens of thousands of feet into the air. The mantle would be ripped up and torn apart. At the time the earth would have been about 1500 years old so there would not have been so many fossils anyway compared to today. And then there were thousands of volcanic eruptions followed by an ice age with sheets of ice a mile high. So there was lots of upheaval. I know that you don't believe all that, but if it is true, it would explain everything generally speaking. Noah' continent is sometimes called Rodinia (from Russian word for Motherland). It broke into sections that reformed and that configuration, as you know, was called Pangaea (from the Greek pan meaning entire and gaea meaning Mother Earth). This then broke up and floated at many miles an hour until it was stopped by an immoveable object and the mountains thrust up and the seven continents appeared that was Noah's even more fallen world at the end of the flood. Agriculture was degraded and I think that is part of the reason that God allowed Noah and his family to eat meat. We know that Pangaea broke up because mountain chains of Appalachia and the Caledonian Mountains match up and were broken up and moved as illustrated in this drawing:

    [​IMG]

    Noah’s Lost World
     
  17. dad1

    dad1 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2016
    Messages:
    302
    Likes Received:
    12
    How would a water column shooting up thousands of miles away from a fossil, say, that was nowhere near that area destroy any fossil?

    Well, I assume that reproduction rates of animals and man was even better than today. So a thousand years and 6 centuries is a long time. You have the additional problem of requiring all layers to be flood caused.

    Now you have a problem of a recent event, the ice age, having to be flood caused also, and the problem of needing the recent event to be simultaneous with layers like the Cambrian.

    I do believe in a lot of upheaval. I do not think that was during the flood year, nor that it destroyed all fossils.

    Yes, I get that. Now the issue is when. And why. And in what nature.

    Another problem for you if agriculture was so degraded right after the flood. We all needed fast growing abundant food still.

    Yes, the great continent separated. Now as for your claim it was in the flood year, that is total speculation. It also leaves you with the migration problem. Animals rafting between continents is pretty weak.
     
  18. church mouse guy

    church mouse guy Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 23, 2002
    Messages:
    13,760
    Likes Received:
    462
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Oh, I have already answered some of these things many times. I think that you meant to say thousands of feet instead of thousands of miles for how far the fountains of the deep shot water into the atmosphere. But rain alone could not cause the flood unless you are saying that the rain was heavier than anything that we have now. If it rained for forty days and forty nights, that alone would not cover the mountains of Rodinia speculated to be about six thousand feet tall at the most.

    The fountains of the deep ripped a seam like the seam on a baseball all around the globe in just a very short time. That much force would be immense pressure on plates of Rodinia. Also, do you think that it is possible that animals lived longer before the flood? We both agree that there was only about 1500 years of earth before the flood, don't we? As for the layers of the geological column, YECs (Young Earth Creationists) like to use the Grand Canyon as an example of all the different layers that were laid down by the flood because the walls of the canyon display the evidence fairly clearly. The layers did not go down in the same order all over the earth but they went down at the time of the flood according to YEC scientists. Eventually the earth sank where the seams were ripped and the water from the flood formed the ocean. With water covering seventy percent of the earth, it would be hard to find pre-Cambrian fossils on the remaining continents.

    As for the Ice Age, you have never specified when you yourself think that it occurred. YECs said that it happened after the Flood because of the warm water from the fountains of the deep and the warmth of the water of the rains. This put off a lot of steam and humidity, right? So the thousands of volcanic eruptions set off by the formation of Pangaea and then, secondly, by the formation of the seven continents that we have today covered the earth with particles preventing the sun from breaking through and causing the moisture in the air to form clouds that cooled to massive ice and snow storms in about thirty percent of the seven continents.

    Because of scientific dating problems, I don't think that we can accurately sort out the fossils from Rodinia that survived in the pre-Cambrian layers. We know that the single continent Rodinia broke up into Pangaea--no one disputes that--and we also that Pangaea immediately reformed into the seven continents. Secular geologists support that fact in some numbers because of things like the Appalachian Mountains and the Caledonian Mountains being made of the same material--a fact that I heard about fifty years ago but I do not know when it was discovered.

    We know that the Dove brought Noah and olive branch, proving that some plant life returned on its own after the Flood receded. Perhaps logs floating around on the waters became stuck somewhere and new trees sprouted out, perhaps some plants just survived the flood--I don't know. If you can imagine the immense size of the Ark, I think that you can see that Noah would have had plenty of room to store many provisions to last a long time. Also, he could have grown some vegetables on the Ark perhaps. And also, there would have been plenty of fish that survived the Flood to feed both animals and man and there may have been plenty of dead animals here and there to satisfy the new carnivores who ate dead animals.

    I think that we have discussed animal migration before several times. The Ice Age is thought to have lowered the sea level six hundred feet, creating many land bridges. Also, massive log floats, noted from Mt. St. Helens and elsewhere, show that the waters of the world might have been log jammed for decades. This would certainly help birds. It has been shown by Kon-Tiki in the 1950s that it is possible to cross the Pacific Ocean on a primitive raft. So there are two means of migrating and I am sure that there were more.

    [​IMG]
     
  19. dad1

    dad1 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2016
    Messages:
    302
    Likes Received:
    12

    No. Let's say the rift was where the mid ocean ridge is today. That would be in the middle of the huge continent, basically, and thousands of miles away from land out on the edges. So how does a shooting fountain thousands of miles away destroy fossils?
    It was the windows of heaven that brought water from the other side of space (firmament) that brought water. Not rainfall.
    Yes. Very likely.

    ? Water does not dissolve fossils does it?
    Here is a timeline I go with.

    montaintwentyone


    I assume the ice age may have started after or during the flood.

    There could be some truth to that, not sure. I tend to lean toward the assumption that other chemicals and stuff were also trapped under the earth. Now if we released with the water, some chemical that maybe was similar to liquid nitrogen, we could have a lot of freezing real fast in the area around the fountain of the deep where such stuff was near or with the water.

    The continents did separate fast. Your problem is that you claim it was because of and in the flood year. There were mountains before the flood and the rapid separation. I have heard some say the Appalachians may be such a range. Again, you cannot claim the flood year did it for no reason.
    Plants did return, yes. That was not Noah's job, just the animals. God took care of plants. He also planted the garden in Eden, so we know He does that.
    The thing is, that in the former nature, trees grew in a few weeks. Plants grew fast. So all the animals and man would have had plenty to eat if trees and plants were there and growing fast. That means it had to be in the former nature. Otherwise, at today's rates, they would starve, waiting for things to grow. That is an indication the former nature still existed after the flood also.
    No need for any of that if it was the former nature.

    Once the animals left the ark, they needed to eat.


    Bingo. If grass used to grow in a day, there would be plenty. If not, then he got what, maybe one crop in his planters?

    Not sure how many fish were on the mountains of Ararat.



    It is simpler and makes more sense to have the rapid separation of continents after the flood, not during.
     
  20. church mouse guy

    church mouse guy Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 23, 2002
    Messages:
    13,760
    Likes Received:
    462
    Faith:
    Baptist
    It doesn't make any sense to say that the animals floated around on the continents when they separated for two reasons: there is no geological evidence and there is no Scriptural evidence.

    Your time chart does not show when the Ice Age occurred. It does not mention the Ice Age. When exactly do you say that the Ice Age occurred?

    When the Ark landed, vegetation had already returned and the Flood waters had receded into the oceans. The oceans are present-day reminders of the Flood.

    No one except you has suggested that the waters destroyed the pre-Cambrian fossils. Plate tectonics says the waters caused the plates great upheaval and destruction. Scripture says that they were broken up. That break up was massive. Rodinia was mostly land; the seven continents are surrounded by seventy percent water--big change. You and I disagree on the Fountains of the Deep. It the land was founded on the Deep, then there was a lot of water under the surface of Rodinia, just as there is today. There is as much water underground today as there is above ground.

    Genesis 7:11 (KJV) In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month, the same day were all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened.

    Genesis 8:2 (KJV) The fountains also of the deep and the windows of heaven were stopped, and the rain from heaven was restrained;
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Loading...