Search This Blog

Wednesday, March 28, 2012

Water from rocks and rocks from water...But no humans from apes!!!

Part one concerns water held within the Earth's crust now.   Read it and then perhaps consider  Dr. Walt Brown's Hydroplate Hypothesis.  His is only one possible explanation for the Flood event and there are competing theories. You know that if you read this blog.   But at any rate, there is still quite a bit of water still within the Earth...and the water that is in the oceans and lakes and rivers now would cover a flattened Earth for a good mile...Rocks from water?   The sedimentary rock layers of the Earth, of course, which were formed by the Flood events and not long ages.

Yes, I may well post the above link again, it is that good.   You can learn more in one article about the rock layers of the Earth than the average public school teacher knows about the sedimentary rocks, as they have been largely propagandized without even knowing it.

After the jump,  various claims of DNA matches between apes and humans are debunked thoroughly by a new Ian Juby Youtube!!!


Date: 28 February 2007 Time: 08:28 AM ET



Scientists scanning the deep interior of Earth have found evidence of a vast water reservoir beneath eastern Asia that is at least the volume of the Arctic Ocean.

The discovery marks the first time such a large body of water has found in the planet's deep mantle. [The World's Biggest Oceans and Seas]

The finding, made by Michael Wysession, a seismologist at Washington University in St. Louis, and his former graduate student Jesse Lawrence, now at the University of California, San Diego, will be detailed in a forthcoming monograph to be published by the American Geophysical Union.

The pair analyzed more than 600,000 seismograms — records of waves generated by earthquakes traveling through the Earth—collected from instruments scattered around the planet. [Image Gallery: This Millennium's Destructive Earthquakes]

They noticed a region beneath Asia where seismic waves appeared to dampen, or "attenuate," and also slow down slightly. "Water slows the speed of waves a little," Wysession explained. "Lots of damping and a little slowing match the predictions for water very well."

Previous predictions calculated that if a cold slab of the ocean floor were to sink thousands of miles into the Earth's mantle, the hot temperatures would cause water stored inside the rock to evaporate out.
"That is exactly what we show here," Wysession said. "Water inside the rock goes down with the sinking slab and it's quite cold, but it heats up the deeper it goes, and the rock eventually becomes unstable and loses its water."

The water then rises up into the overlying region, which becomes saturated with water [image]. "It would still look like solid rock to you,” Wysession told LiveScience. "You would have to put it in the lab to find the water in it."

Although they appear solid, the composition of some ocean floor rocks is up to 15 percent water. "The water molecules are actually stuck in the mineral structure of the rock," Wysession explained. "As you heat this up, it eventually dehydrates. It's like taking clay and firing it to get all the water out."

The researchers estimate that up to 0.1 percent of the rock sinking down into the Earth's mantle in that part of the world is water, which works out to about an Arctic Ocean's worth of water.

"That's a real back of the envelope type calculation," Wysession said. "That's the best that we can do at this point."


The Beijing anomaly

Wysession has dubbed the new underground feature the "Beijing anomaly," because seismic wave attenuation was found to be highest beneath the Chinese capital city. Wysession first used the moniker during a presentation of his work at the University of Beijing.

"They thought it was very, very interesting," Wysession said. "China is under greater seismic risk than just about any country in the world, so they are very interested in seismology." [Natural Disasters: Top 10 US Threats]

Water covers 70 percent of Earth's surface and one of its many functions is to act like a lubricant for the movement of continental plates.

"Look at our sister planet, Venus," Wysession said. "It is very hot and dry inside Venus, and Venus has no plate tectonics. All the water probably boiled off, and without water, there are no plates. The system is locked up, like a rusty Tin Man with no oil."

What's Down There


The Earth’s radius is about 4,000 miles (6,400 kilometers). The main layers of its interior are in descending order: crust, mantle and core.

The crust thickness averages about 18 miles (30 kilometers) under the continents, but is only about 3 miles (5 kilometers) under the oceans. It is light and brittle and can break. In fact it's fractured into more than a dozen major plates and several minor ones. It is where most earthquakes originate.

The mantle is more flexible – it flows instead of fractures. It extends down to about 1,800 miles (2,900 kilometers) below the surface.

The core consists of a solid inner core and a fluid outer core. The fluid contains iron, which, as it moves, generates the Earth’s magnetic field. The crust and upper mantle form the lithosphere, which is broken up into several plates that float on top of the hot molten mantle below.

SOURCE: LiveScience reporting

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
But no humans from Apes...

8 comments:

Anonymous said...

Humans from apes, that old chestnut.

You don't really think that that's what science says, do you?

radar said...

No, I do not believe that man evolved from apes. Furthermore there is no one thing that "science" says. "Science" is a pursuit of knowledge and truth, not a person who issues opinions. Neither is the most common opinion worthy of the moniker. Whether 200 million Darwinists believe that humans evolved from lower forms or 200, that does not mean "Science" says anything. "Science" does not say anything at all.

Scientism, on the other hand, is the settled position of the ruling paradigm of naturalistic materialists. Scientism claims that only the scientific method twisted to only include natural causes and systems can reveal truth. Metaphysical and philosophical arguments are supposedly ignored, but in fact scientism is just a facet of the faith of Naturalistic Materialism. It is simply a faith position that stands in opposition to the faith position of Theism.

Whoever you are, anonymous, you cannot speak for "Science" and I am sure that is a very good thing.

Jon Woolf said...

"Yes, I may well post the above link again, it is that good."

It is indeed. Good at proving two different things, in fact.

First, it proves that your own claims about the fossil record being non-sequential are nonsense. Oard clearly admits throughout the article that the fossil record is sequential - for example, dinosaurs always above trilobites and Mesozoic strata (identified as such by the fossils therein) always above Paleozoic strata and below Cenozoic strata.

Second, it proves (yet again) that creationism isn't science. Oard assumes that the Flood occurred, then invents whatever sensible-sounding doubletalk he needs to in order to avoid falsifying that assumption. There are many names for such a performance, but "science" isn't one of them.

Anonymous said...

"No, I do not believe that man evolved from apes."

The usual obfuscation... The question is, do you believe that "Darwinists" believe that man evolved from apes?

Or do you understand that you're just peddling a lame strawman argument?

radar said...

Oard and Walker and other creationists see a sequential pattern in rock formations according to expected flood distributions and not evolution.
I've published articles by both and your attempt to twist their output to "agree" with your hypothesis is plain wrong.

Dr. Henry Morris, the hydrologist, recognized the flood patterns in the rock records, only on a huge scale and rocked the world with "The Genesis Flood" that he authored along with John Whitcomb. Thus began the slow but steady growth of scientists and laymen who have stepped away from Darwinism and realized Creation by God is very close to a scientific certainty. When Ian Juby did the experiments with the flume (also found in this blog), he and his colleagues were able to produce all the sedimentary rock layering we see on Earth. Uniformitarianism cannot even begin to claim this because there are more anomalies than normal patterns in the real world. The mythical column seen in textbooks is practically nonexistent in real life.


In fact, Darwin himself expected that, when more fossils were found, there would be intermediate forms everywhere, transitionals, that would show a continuum of evolving creatures. Nope! Nothing but fully-formed and functional creatures. Jon, you just do not know what you are talking about.

As to whether Darwinists believe man evolved from apes, that depends on the Darwinist. Some do, some think both evolved from a common ancestor and you can find documents authored by Darwinists professing both. However, the DNA sequencing shows us that Darwinists lie to try to make the common man THINK we evolved from apes or a common ancestor by gaming the numbers. This kind of intentional deception is typical.

Jon Woolf said...

"Oard and Walker and other creationists see a sequential pattern in rock formations according to expected flood distributions and not evolution."

Ah, but Radar, you yourself are on record as declaring that there is no sequence to the fossil record at all. How is it you phrased it ... ah, yes: "The rock layers are not sequential and neither are the fossils." (http://radaractive.blogspot.com/2012/01/part-three-in-arguments-for-god-what.html?showComment=1326557608342#c7398051132645247007)

You've also posted articles that say the same thing. And yet, here is Michael Oard saying the exact opposite: that there is a general sequence to the geologic record. Make up your mind, young padawan. Is the record sequential, or isn't it?

"In fact, Darwin himself expected that, when more fossils were found, there would be intermediate forms everywhere, transitionals, that would show a continuum of evolving creatures. Nope! Nothing but fully-formed and functional creatures."

Of course. What did you expect, a Monopterosaurus with one wing and one foreleg, or a Balaenoptera tetrapodus with a complete blue whale's body on four strong legs? Nonsense. Evolutionary theory has never said we'd find such things. Evolutionary theory says that every organism contains genetic variations which make it different from its parent(s); that over time, selection will favor those organisms with variations that help them survive better; and that over many thousands of generations, variation and selection can add up to large changes between ultimate-ancestor and ultimate-descendant.

radar said...

Sorry, Jon, you are not following what I am saying. Rocks are not sequential in the Uniformitarian sense at all. There are ways in which the general layering represents a Flood event and both Oard and Walker have presented a general Geologic column which reflects the actual rock layers far better than the debunked and popular one found in school textbooks and only present in perhaps 0.4 % of the investigated world.

The concept of "sequential" to a Flood Geologist is a matter of when the layers were produced. During the beginning phase of the Flood? During the end of the first 40 days of rain and water coming from underground and earthquakes and volcanoes, etc? During the time in which the Earth was entirely underwater? During the time in which the water ran off and the dry land rose and the basins for the oceans? During the dynamic period right after the Flood in which we had an ice age and glacial activity and then huge lakes and dike breaks? All of these are stages rather than sequential layers per se.

What we see in the real world are all the signs of a world-wide flood. Megagreccias, planation, polystrates, out-of-sequence and/or "missing" layers put the lie to uniformitarianism. Besides, all the rock layers are catastrophic and associated with water event(s) so you have no leg to stand on.

Now, when it comes to fossils, if evolution were true then a continuum of evolving animals would be represented. Instead we have lots of extinctions and very little change in those animals alive today. A lot of animals found now are just like the ones found in the fossil record. Some are largely identical but smaller, not surprising, as conditions on Earth now are not as friendly to longer ages of animals and bigger bodies (part of this would be tied to the amount of oxygen in the atmosphere today) but what we do not see is transitionals. According to Darwinism, there should be transitionals everywhere as organisms changed from one thing to another. Instead we see either stasis or extinction.

Just because you can throw the names of extinct animals around does not make you more scientific or accurate. We would in fact expect to find fins turning into legs and arms turning into wings and so on but we do not find this. Why? Because evolution is not true. Devolution is what we do find. Animals lose functions and systems and arms and wings but they do not gain them.

Jon Woolf said...

As always, it's fun to watch you squirm, Radar.

"Rocks are not sequential in the Uniformitarian sense at all."

Except that they are, and Creationists who pay at least some attention to the facts know it.

"What we see in the real world are all the signs of a world-wide flood."

Except, of course, where we don't: river sandstones, aeolian sandstones, volcanic ash layers, lava flows, fossil-bearing layers that clearly hardened long before they were deformed by tectonic movement...

"Now, when it comes to fossils, if evolution were true then a continuum of evolving animals would be represented."

It is.

"A lot of animals found now are just like the ones found in the fossil record."

The recent fossil record. Not the older, deeper strata. Nothing now living resembles a theropod, a pterosaur, a gorgonopsid, an ichthyosaur, a trilobite, an anomalocarid...

"According to Darwinism, there should be transitionals everywhere as organisms changed from one thing to another. "

And there are.

"We would in fact expect to find fins turning into legs and arms turning into wings and so on but we do not find this."

But not the way you think. We find animals with limbs that were useful both as fins and as legs, like Tiktaalik and Acanthostega. We find animals with limbs that were useful both as arms and as wings. like Archaeopteryx and Microraptor. Always, the intermediate stages are useful to the organism in their current form. That's how evolution works.