was the reason for the paleontological order.
Bill,
Since you believe in a global flood could you explain how your model spares
Noah from choking on an acidic atmosphere? I posted a note a couple of
days ago entitled 'choking Noah' in which I calculated the amount of H2S04
emitted by the volcanic rocks embedded in the sedimentary, flood deposited
rocks. The atmosphere would be highly acidic if all the volcanic rocks
were deposited in a single year.
One of your fellow young-earth creationists, Carl Froede, suggested that
the volcanic rocks were deposited underwater and the acid ate away at the
limestone creating karsts and caves. I replied:
One of the reasons my note on choking Noah didn't use the flood waters to
absorb the sulphuric acid is because the volcanic traps, I cited show no
lithological texture of having been extruded under water. As you are
aware, magma when extruded underwater, is immediately quenched into pillow
shapes. That is why underwater extruded lava is called pillow lava. The
traps don't have pillow lava and look like subaerial flows. One of the
flows studied by Steven Austin in his former life as Stuart Nevins from the
Eocene John Day formation concluded that it had to have been deposited
subaerially.
"One of the most perplexing difficulties presented by the Mesa basalt
is its horizontal extent compared to thickness. As an illustration of the
remarkable thinness of the Mesa compared to its widespread flow, imagine
that the actual thickness of the flow were reduced in scale to this
thickness of a page of this Quarterly. In order to represent to scale the
maximum horizontal dimension of the flow, the page would have to be 20 feet
long!" ~ Stuart Nevins, "The Mesa Basalt of the Northwestern United
States," Creation Research Society Quarterly, (March 1971), pp 222-226, p. 224
the basalt is 30-40 feet over 100,000 square miles p. 225
**
"It is the opinion of the author that the Mesa basalt as well as many
other Cenozoic basalts flowed after the Noachian Flood. The Mesa basalt
could not have flowed during the flood otherwise it would have been
'quenched' by the waters and could not have spread so broadly." ~ Stuart
Nevins, "The Mesa Basalt of the Northwestern United States," Creation
Research Society Quarterly, (March 1971), pp 222-226, p. 225
I am trying to believe what young earth creationists like Nevins says
because I am sure that he isn't wrong. Individual flows of other areas are
also equally thin compared to their extent.
Also I am aware that H2SO4 can be absorbed by water, but I wasn't
interested in that at the time because Noah was not underwater but above
the water as were the lavas of which the traps are made. My note the other
day was designed to see what Noah must have dealt with.
But since you want to talk about H2SO4 underwater, Austin, Baumgardner et
al, "Catastrophic Plate Tectonics," 3rd ICC ppp 609-621 suggest that the
entire motion of the continents was accomplished in the flood year. This
means that a 5 km thick layer of basalt was extruded onto the ocean floor.
5 km is the thickness of the oceanic crust.
The ocean area is 361 x 10^6 km^2 and the volume of basalt extruded during
the flood is
5 km x 361 x 10^6 km^2 = 1.805 x 10^9 km^3
Since there are 2.5 megatons of H2SO4 per km^3 we find that the rapid
continental drift would release
2.5 x 1.805 x 10^9 = 4.5 x 10^9 megatons or 4.5 x 10^9 megatons x 10^6
tons/megatons = 4.5 x 10^15 tons.
Multiplying the tonage by 1016 kg/ton we find that continental drift released
4.584 x 10^18 kg of H2SO4
The mass of the ocean is 1.4 x 10^21 kg. Thus you have a .3% solution of
acid (by weight)in the oceans.
Please educate me about this problem for the flood. Would the EPA allow a
factory to discharge enough acid to turn the river into a .3% solution (by
weight)? If so, where can I build the factory? Can you cite the appropriate
regulations governing acid emissions in support of your position? I don't
beleive that fish can live in such highly acidic waters and they were not
protected by the ark and acid is as bad for the gills as it is for the lungs.
Also, if the acid is used to eat away the limestone that the flood was busy
depositing, please help this ol' country boy understand why it wouldn't eat
the shells of shellfish. Shellfish also were not protected by the Ark and
would be subject to this highly acidic water. How could shellfish and
regular fish survive is such acidity? I await your education as I am sure
that a member of the EPA of our fine US government can explain why the acid
can eat limestone but not living shellfish.
I am not a chemist so I don't know if this is correct, but a friend
calculated that that much acid in the oceans would have a ph of 2.2.
So, Bill, please tell me how you avoid this problem? If rising waters of
the flood are the answer to the paleontological order, your scenario must
be able to explain this problem or there were no rising waters.
Do you have God miraculously withhold the sulphuric acid?
Do you think that Noah could breathe acidic air?
Do you think the Fish could live in acidic water?
glenn
Adam, Apes and Anthropology
Foundation, Fall and Flood
& lots of creation/evolution information
http://www.isource.net/~grmorton/dmd.htm