Archaeologica.org

archaeologist wrote:even so given the circumferance of the oceans even an inch or two would be a lot of water. i do not think that the ice caps would be able to suport such volume.

Given your arithmatic prowess I recommend you rethink.

Given your arithmatic prowess I recommend you rethink.

how about breadth of the oceans, circumferance was the best word i could think of at the time. however you measure the oceans, they are wide and long and even an inch or two requires a huge amount of water.

since water expands into ice, 3 miles of ice does not equal 3 miles of water. thus the ice caps may be unable to provide this extra liquid required to raise the sea levels.

archaeologist wrote:

Given your arithmatic prowess I recommend you rethink.

how about breadth of the oceans, circumferance was the best word i could think of at the time. however you measure the oceans, they are wide and long and even an inch or two requires a huge amount of water.

since water expands into ice, 3 miles of ice does not equal 3 miles of water. thus the ice caps may be unable to provide this extra liquid required to raise the sea levels.

This is what happens with wild guesswork.
You should have rethunk.

since water expands into ice, 3 miles of ice does not equal 3 miles of water. thus the ice caps may be unable to provide this extra liquid required to raise the sea levels.

Wait a minute, arch....you were the guy arguing that there was enough water to cover the whole earth...now you're claiming that it wouldn't even raise sea level?

You didn't go to a science class with George Bush, did you?

Wait a minute, arch....you were the guy arguing that there was enough water to cover the whole earth...now you're claiming that

i am just asking him where he feels the water comes from since he doesn't believe there was enough to cover the earth. not arguing against it, just pointing out some loopholes in his position.

This is what happens with wild guesswork

no, i think that is science 101.

so again if the sea levels are rising, where is the water coming from? when and where will it stop? once the the earth has been flooded?

with the limitedness of water available, scientists should be able to predict when rise levels off and people will be safe and if that is so, then scripture is proven true again that God would not flood the earth a second time.

[/img]

3 miles of ice does not equal 3 miles of water

but at least ice stay on top of water.melting of ice caps like this one causes sea level rising.


if all these ice caps melt there will be no more sea level rising after that!!

He is confusing the idea of ice bergs, 90% of which are underwater and thus displace water with glaciers which are on land and when they melt add an equivalent amount of water to the oceans.

though ice bergs come from glaciers and the ice caps which have all been previously measured for size. so where is the extra water then?

http://science.howstuffworks.com/questi ... e down....[/quote]

And when ice bergs fall off glaciers they raise the water level, genius.

Read this and settle down

mini, what do you think of this newbie trying to tell us to settle down??

when ice bergs fall off glaciers they raise the water level, genius.

ha ha ha ha yeah right. at least i got you to call me genius. one true thing you have said in a long while-ha ha h a

Take it as humour its what i say day to day, dont take it like i am telling you to shut up...Just my way of say "hey look what i found, take a second and look at it before you continue" Sorry

Therefore creationists 6000 year timeline is just a figment of narrow minded fanatic mysticism , and just downright stupid.

I believe in creation and I dont believe it is only six thousand years.

according to the bible, we are still in the "seventh day"
and it is already at the 6000 isnt it?

some people I guess take "day" way too literaly.

I could say "in my day" I could be talking about my youth or teen years etc...

I notice there is a trend to subvert the bible, I wonder why?
I remember when archeologists and scientists used it
as a good reference.

so I thought this would be a topic about proof of a big flood.
guess not.
I really want to know if Archeologists have seen evidence
in the stratum layers? I could swear
I saw mention of that in a National geo documentary years ago.

I notice there is a trend to subvert the bible, I wonder why?

Because it's bullshit.

Wait a minute, arch....you were the guy arguing that there was enough water to cover the whole earth...now you're claiming that it wouldn't even raise sea level?

You didn't go to a science class with George Bush, did you?

I believe it has something to do with the topography of the earth, then and now.
The earths crust being relatively thin, had stretched over a rather plastic mass thousands of kilometers in diameter. hence, under the added weight of the water, there was likely a great shifting in the crust. , new mountains thrust upward, old mountains rose even higher, shallow sea basins deepen new shorelines develop etc....
liken that to a boggy area totaly covered by water but shallow, if you dig a pool the water will gather THERE.
this is a plausable explanation. what do you think?