Is it possible that the allegorical account of a great flood is true?

[ReinyDays]

water vapor works both ways. It can reduce the energy reaching the planet and act as a greenhouse gas.

Another physics mistake ... water vapor is transparent to the vast majority of incoming solar energy ... sometimes called shortwave radiation ... water vapor interferes only with the outgoing energy ... sometimes called longwave radiation ...

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

I bet I've studied them more than you.

Nah, you're just blowing smoke, As you always do.

Really?...

Yes, really. Do you realize how small that site was in 8000 years ago? Do you realize it was a monument then, and not a large settlement? The point, of course, is that the collections of humans were relatively quite small and did not do much communicating over large distances. If you want to be silly and argue with that, knock yourself out.

If westwall is correct about sea level, and I personally think he is

Which just makes you both wrong, as I already demonstrated.

Where did the people who made it learn their trade?

A silly question. Where did the people who taught them learn? And the people before that? Someone invented "the trade" (which was, cutting stones with other stones). Furthermore, you seem to have an awfully exaggerated version of what that site was like 8000 years ago. Again,. I suggest you read your own links.

How would you know what they knew?

Are you joking? How would I know... what environment humans lived in? Because... it was on planet Earth. Stop being silly.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Instant vaporization and super heating of 1500 gigatons of ice thrown high into the stratosphere.

Ding, please stop lying. It has already been shown the article doesn't say anything like that. Why are you like this? Do you have ANY shame whatsoever?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

it just goes to show you didn’t even read the article.

Actually, ya shameless little liar, I posted that, but (unlike you), in context. Sorry, nowhere does it state or even imply that much water was vaporized. In fact, it veryspecifically talks about it melting and running off into the ocean.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Im not claiming it raised the sea level.

Right, you're lying your ass off and claiming it all fell as rain. because, well, you have to lie your ass off to maintain your already destroyed point. Which should tell you something.

 

[ding]

Next problem is 8th grade math ... if all the energy released by these 700 1 megaton bombs was used to vaporize ice ... we'd only melt 1 gigaton, not the crazy stupid 1,500 gigatons your article is claiming ...

Great. Show your math. I’d love to see it.

4.2 x 10^15 J/megaton of TNT * 700 mega tons of TNT = 2.9 x 10^18 J
2.9 x 10^18 J ÷ 2.6 x 10^6 J/kg = 1.1 x 10^12 kg = 1.1 gigatons of ice vaporized

1.5 x 10^18 kg ÷ 1 x 10^6 kg/m^3 = 1.5 x 10^12 m^3
1.5 x 10^12 m^3 ÷ 3.6 x 10^8 m^2 = 4.2 x 10^3 m ≈ 4 kilometers sea level drop

No Algebra involved ...

The article should have read 700 gigatons of TNT.

Here is the published paper.
https://www.researchgate.net/public...neath_Hiawatha_Glacier_in_northwest_Greenland

Here is an excerpt from the published paper.

"...The diameter of an impact crater constrains the kinetic energy of the impactor. The formation of a 31-km-wide impact crater in crystalline target rock requires ~3 × 10 ^21 J of energy (17)."

Here is the reference which was cited for the calculation.

17. G. S. Collins, H. J. Melosh, R. A. Marcus, Earth Impact Effects Program: A Web-based computer program for calculating he regional environmental consequence of a meteoroid impact on Earth. Meteorit. Planet. Sci. 40, 817–840 (2005)

The bottom line is that there is a massive crater in the polar region which would have resulted in a global climatic change which was a sudden event which released massive amounts of water vapor in the atmosphere which would have come down as rain. Glad to see you missed the forest for the trees.

 

[ding]

Where do you believe the water vapor went?

Assuming everything you said about the event actually happened, and the vapor fell as rain, how much do you think it would have raised the global sea level? 1 foot, 100 feet, 10,000 feet? Even if it were 10,000 feet there are large portions of the earth that would not have been submerged.

I don’t believe it would have raised the sea level. It wasn’t the sea level rise that caused the flooding. It was the runoff of the rain that caused the flooding. Just as all other floods do. Too much rain over too short of a period is what causes floods.

Such floods usually occur in flat, low-lying areas, floodplains. It's hard to envision a scenario where ALL living animals are destroyed.

Again... an allegorical account that happened thousands of years before it was recorded in writing.

You seem to be arguing both sides here, that the Bible is historically and scientifically accurate AND that it is allegorical. I can't be both so which is it?

It only seems that way to you because you aren't interested in the truth. So you look for things to nit pick.

The first five books of the Bible (known as the Torah) were written by Moses - an adopted son of the king of Egypt - in approximately 1400 B.C.. These five books focus on the beginning of the nation of Israel; but the first 11 chapters of the Torah records the history that all nations have in common. These allegorical accounts of the history of the world had been passed down from generation to generation orally for thousands of years. Moses did not really write the first 11 chapters of the Bible. Moses was the first Hebrew to record them.

Approximately 800 years before Moses recorded the allegorical accounts of the history of the world. The Chinese recorded this history as symbols in the Chinese language. They drew pictures to express words or ideas. Simple pictures were combined to make more complex thoughts. They used well known history and common everyday things to make a word so people could easily remember it. The account of Genesis found it's way into the Chinese written language because the Chinese had migrated from the cradle of civilization. Prior to this migration they all shared a common history and religion.

The Bible even explains how it was possible for the Chinese to record the account of Genesis 800 years before Moses recorded it. The account of the Tower of Babel was the allegorical account of the great migration from Mesopotamia. This also explains why all ancient cultures have an account of a great flood. Because they all shared a common history and religion before the great migration from the cradle of civilization.

So if we start from the belief that the first eleven chapters of the Torah are an allegorical account of world history before the great migration from Mesopotamia - which was an actual historical event - then the first eleven chapters of the Torah takes on new meaning. Seen in this light these accounts should be viewed less like fairy tales and more like how important information was passed down in ancient times. Just as the Chinese used well known history and everyday things as symbols in their written language to make words easier to remember, ancient man used stories to pass down historical events and important knowledge to future generations. Interspersed in these allegorical accounts of history are wisdoms that they deemed important enough to pass down and remember. Such as man knows right from wrong and when he violates it, rather than abandoning the concept of right and wrong he rationalizes he didn't do wrong. Most people don't even realize this wisdom is in the Torah because they read it critically instead of searching for the wisdom that ancient man knew and found important enough to include in his account of world history.

We have to keep in mind that these accounts are at least 6,000 years old and were passed down orally from one generation to the next for thousands of years. Surely ancient man believed these accounts were of the utmost importance otherwise they would not have been passed down for thousands of years before they were recorded in writing. We shouldn't view these accounts using the context of the modern world. Unfortunately, we are so far removed from these events that we have lost all original meaning. If you were to ask almost any Jew what the Tower of Babel was about he would have no clue that it was the allegorical account of the great migration from the cradle of civilization. That is not intended to be a criticism. It is intended to be an illustration of just how difficult a task it is to discover the original meaning from ancient accounts which are at least 6,000 years old. We read these texts like they were written yesterday looking for ways to discredit them and make ourselves feel superior rather than seeking the original meaning and wisdom.

So, a great flood did happen. It was caused by an asteroid strike in the northern polar region. It probably happened 12,000 years ago. The energy released was equivalent to 700 gigatons of TNT and instantly vaporized 1500 gigatons of ice into the atmosphere which caused global wide disruptions in the weather patterns and caused massive amounts of rain around the globe. The science is staring you in the face. You just don't like it because it confirms the account of a great flood.

 

[ding]

it just goes to show you didn’t even read the article.

Actually, ya shameless little liar, I posted that, but (unlike you), in context. Sorry, nowhere does it state or even imply that much water was vaporized. In fact, it veryspecifically talks about it melting and running off into the ocean.

Here's the science. You sound like a science denier.

https://www.researchgate.net/public...neath_Hiawatha_Glacier_in_northwest_Greenland

 

[ding]

Im not claiming it raised the sea level.

Right, you're lying your ass off and claiming it all fell as rain. because, well, you have to lie your ass off to maintain your already destroyed point. Which should tell you something.

What exactly do you believe would happen when 1500 gigatons of ice are instantly vaporized?

Here's some more science for you.

(D) Bed topography based on airborne radar sounding from 1997 to 2014 NASA data and 2016 Alfred Wegener Institute (AWI) data. Black triangles represent elevated rim picks from the radargrams, and the dark purple circles represent peaks in the central uplift. Hatched red lines are field measurements of the strike of ice-marginal bedrock structures. Black circles show location of the three glaciofluvial sediment samples described in table S1.

 

[ding]

water vapor works both ways. It can reduce the energy reaching the planet and act as a greenhouse gas.

Another physics mistake ... water vapor is transparent to the vast majority of incoming solar energy ... sometimes called shortwave radiation ... water vapor interferes only with the outgoing energy ... sometimes called longwave radiation ...

Water vapor forms clouds. It blocks the energy from reaching earth. You can experience this for yourself on a partly cloudy day as clouds pass over and block the sun's rays.

At night cloud cover traps the heat leaving the earth. It can be as much as 20 degrees warmer on mornings where there is cloud cover than on mornings which are cloud free. You can experience this effect for yourself too.

 

[ReinyDays]

The article should have read 700 gigatons of TNT.

I'm afraid it didn't ... it said 700 one megaton bombs ... do you claim it should have said 700 one gigaton bombs ... no such thing ...

Do you wish to retract your claims until you've had a chance to find the error in the article? ...

Here is the published paper.
https://www.researchgate.net/public...neath_Hiawatha_Glacier_in_northwest_Greenland

Here is an excerpt from the published paper.

"...The diameter of an impact crater constrains the kinetic energy of the impactor. The formation of a 31-km-wide impact crater in crystalline target rock requires ~3 × 10 ^21 J of energy (17)."

Here is the reference which was cited for the calculation.

17. G. S. Collins, H. J. Melosh, R. A. Marcus, Earth Impact Effects Program: A Web-based computer program for calculating he regional environmental consequence of a meteoroid impact on Earth. Meteorit. Planet. Sci. 40, 817–840 (2005)

How much of this energy was use to create the 31 km diameter crater? ... if none, we still only see 1,100 gigatons of ice vaporizing, but then we won't have found the crater ... now would we have? ... you got to do better in light of the very serious mistake noted above ... let's see hard numbers excavating that much Earth ...

The bottom line is that there is a massive crater in the polar region which would have resulted in a global climatic change which was a sudden event which released massive amounts of water vapor in the atmosphere which would have come down as rain. Glad to see you missed the forest for the trees.

It would take a long while for this water vapor to condense and rain down ... we have the other half of the conservation laws, where does the energy go once the water vapor condenses? ... we can't just destroy it, we have to radiate out again and that will take some time ... water vapor is a greenhouse gas, outbound energy transfer is inhibited ...

You've missed the ocean ... sea level's dropped 4 km ... that's going to play hell on Earth's energy budget ...

 

[ding]

The article should have read 700 gigatons of TNT.

I'm afraid it didn't ... it said 700 one megaton bombs ... do you claim it should have said 700 one gigaton bombs ... no such thing ...

Do you wish to retract your claims until you've had a chance to find the error in the article? ...

Here is the published paper.
https://www.researchgate.net/public...neath_Hiawatha_Glacier_in_northwest_Greenland

Here is an excerpt from the published paper.

"...The diameter of an impact crater constrains the kinetic energy of the impactor. The formation of a 31-km-wide impact crater in crystalline target rock requires ~3 × 10 ^21 J of energy (17)."

Here is the reference which was cited for the calculation.

17. G. S. Collins, H. J. Melosh, R. A. Marcus, Earth Impact Effects Program: A Web-based computer program for calculating he regional environmental consequence of a meteoroid impact on Earth. Meteorit. Planet. Sci. 40, 817–840 (2005)

How much of this energy was use to create the 31 km diameter crater? ... if none, we still only see 1,100 gigatons of ice vaporizing, but then we won't have found the crater ... now would we have? ... you got to do better in light of the very serious mistake noted above ... let's see hard numbers excavating that much Earth ...

The bottom line is that there is a massive crater in the polar region which would have resulted in a global climatic change which was a sudden event which released massive amounts of water vapor in the atmosphere which would have come down as rain. Glad to see you missed the forest for the trees.

It would take a long while for this water vapor to condense and rain down ... we have the other half of the conservation laws, where does the energy go once the water vapor condenses? ... we can't just destroy it, we have to radiate out again and that will take some time ... water vapor is a greenhouse gas, outbound energy transfer is inhibited ...

You've missed the ocean ... sea level's dropped 4 km ... that's going to play hell on Earth's energy budget ...

I provided the published paper, bro. Read it.

Here is an excerpt from the published paper.

"...The diameter of an impact crater constrains the kinetic energy of the impactor. The formation of a 31-km-wide impact crater in crystalline target rock requires ~3 × 10 ^21 J of energy (17)."

Here is the reference which was cited for the calculation.

17. G. S. Collins, H. J. Melosh, R. A. Marcus, Earth Impact Effects Program: A Web-based computer program for calculating he regional environmental consequence of a meteoroid impact on Earth. Meteorit. Planet. Sci. 40, 817–840 (2005)

The bottom line is that there is a massive crater in the polar region which would have resulted in a global climatic change which was a sudden event which released massive amounts of water vapor in the atmosphere which would have come down as rain. Glad to see you missed the forest for the trees.

 

[ding]

The article should have read 700 gigatons of TNT.

I'm afraid it didn't ... it said 700 one megaton bombs ... do you claim it should have said 700 one gigaton bombs ... no such thing ...

Do you wish to retract your claims until you've had a chance to find the error in the article? ...

Here is the published paper.
https://www.researchgate.net/public...neath_Hiawatha_Glacier_in_northwest_Greenland

Here is an excerpt from the published paper.

"...The diameter of an impact crater constrains the kinetic energy of the impactor. The formation of a 31-km-wide impact crater in crystalline target rock requires ~3 × 10 ^21 J of energy (17)."

Here is the reference which was cited for the calculation.

17. G. S. Collins, H. J. Melosh, R. A. Marcus, Earth Impact Effects Program: A Web-based computer program for calculating he regional environmental consequence of a meteoroid impact on Earth. Meteorit. Planet. Sci. 40, 817–840 (2005)

How much of this energy was use to create the 31 km diameter crater? ... if none, we still only see 1,100 gigatons of ice vaporizing, but then we won't have found the crater ... now would we have? ... you got to do better in light of the very serious mistake noted above ... let's see hard numbers excavating that much Earth ...

The bottom line is that there is a massive crater in the polar region which would have resulted in a global climatic change which was a sudden event which released massive amounts of water vapor in the atmosphere which would have come down as rain. Glad to see you missed the forest for the trees.

It would take a long while for this water vapor to condense and rain down ... we have the other half of the conservation laws, where does the energy go once the water vapor condenses? ... we can't just destroy it, we have to radiate out again and that will take some time ... water vapor is a greenhouse gas, outbound energy transfer is inhibited ...

You've missed the ocean ... sea level's dropped 4 km ... that's going to play hell on Earth's energy budget ...

Would you like to argue with NASA too?

(D) Bed topography based on airborne radar sounding from 1997 to 2014 NASA data and 2016 Alfred Wegener Institute (AWI) data. Black triangles represent elevated rim picks from the radargrams, and the dark purple circles represent peaks in the central uplift. Hatched red lines are field measurements of the strike of ice-marginal bedrock structures. Black circles show location of the three glaciofluvial sediment samples described in table S1.

 

[Votto]

Massive crater under Greenland’s ice points to climate-altering impact in the time of humans

Is it possible that the allegorical account of a great flood, which all ancient cultures have, is true?

Na, it's all just one big conspiracy theory joke all the ancient cultures of the world were trying to play on us.

Sucker!!

 

[ReinyDays]

What exactly do you believe would happen when 1500 megatons of ice are instantly vaporized?

Moving the goal posts? ... the article in the OP stated 1,500 gigatons of ice ...

 

[ding]

What exactly do you believe would happen when 1500 megatons of ice are instantly vaporized?

Moving the goal posts? ... the article in the OP stated 1,500 gigatons of ice ...

The article misstated the original published scientific paper.

Read the paper. It's been peer reviewed and published.

https://www.researchgate.net/public...neath_Hiawatha_Glacier_in_northwest_Greenland

 

[ReinyDays]

Water vapor forms clouds. It blocks the energy from reaching earth. You can experience this for yourself on a partly cloudy day as clouds pass over and block the sun's rays.

At night cloud cover traps the heat leaving the earth. It can be as much as 20 degrees warmer on mornings where there is cloud cover than on mornings which are cloud free. You can experience this effect for yourself too.

Wrong ... clouds are liquid water or ice ... if you can see it, it's absolutely not water vapor ... all the energy absorbed to vaporize the water must be released again while it condenses or deposits ... thus the conservation law issues pointed out above ...

The atmosphere is 100ºC or better ... we still have some ocean left that would moderate the temperature ... you can work the gradient and figure the lapse rate under these circumstances ... I'm sorry, I can just glance at the problem and know it won't be pretty for you ...

Only life in what remains in the oceans will survive ... and sparsely at that ... a billion years before life returns to land? ... not as bad as Venus, but bad enough ... the Bible never says God boiled all the lands and waters ... does it? ...

 

[ReinyDays]

Would you like to argue with NASA too?

Link to NASA's claim that 1,500 gigatons of ice vaporized with this event? ...

 

[ding]

Would you like to argue with NASA too?

Link to NASA's claim that 1,500 gigatons of ice vaporized with this event? ...

Yes, it is 1500 gigatons of ice. The article misstated the amount of energy released to vaporize the ice. That should have been 700,000 megatons or 700 gigatons of TNT.

In fact, your own calculation proved it. Start with the correct energy from the published paper.

"...The diameter of an impact crater constrains the kinetic energy of the impactor. The formation of a 31-km-wide impact crater in crystalline target rock requires ~3 × 10 ^21 J of energy (17)."

 

[ding]

Would you like to argue with NASA too?

Link to NASA's claim that 1,500 gigatons of ice vaporized with this event? ...

NASA's imaging of the crater is what led to the calculation of energy and the estimate of ice that was vaporized.

You are literally arguing against a peer reviewed scientific paper.