Hydroplate Theory

You think that when a continent moved, it had no animals on it??? Why is that. The evidence is that animals were here since creation, and in science, that fossils do exist on continents.

I would say it happened in the former nature. I would say, as the chart shows, that the nature change was in the days of Peleg. In fact, I recently found out that Babel probably was at the time Peleg was 5 years old.

The mountains were covered. When it landed, no plants were seen. A bird sent out, still no plants. Only a week later when again birds were sent was the evidence of new growth.

Well, I guess if you claim the Cambrian was laid down by the flood, that would not be the case. So now you have the Cambrian and the ice age and the flood, and almost everything else all attributed to one year. I guess all other prior layers were destroyed in that year also in your system.

How much water was under the earth and where, we do not know. There is no reason from the bible or scientifically to attribute most of the water from the flood to that which came from below. Nor is there any reason to say that the waters destroyed all fossils.

Yes, there were both, and they started and stopped.

 

In what way, and why? You think the continents went underwater?

Well, if they occurred after they would be still there. Since I suspect the flood was around the KT layer, that was nowhere near the ice age.

The water under the land? When was this surveyed? In creation week, the waters were separated from the land. So I am not sure that means on top or water.

 

Most creation scientists prefer Dr. Baumgardner’s Catastrophic Plate Tectonics (CPT) over Dr. Brown’s Hydroplate Model. There’s still debate, and both models seem to have some problems. I don’t know which is true. It would take a lot ornate scientific investigation which I don’t want to do—not now, anyway.

Hydroplate theory - creation.com

 

Being underwater does not destroy all fossils on a continent. What evidence do you have to claim they were underwater when they moved? I mean they move a bit even today, and they are above water. Who says the rapid continental movement was done submerged??

I don't know.

What is that time based on?

I would guess that it started at the flood also, or possibly at the nature change. The nature change, probably was about 106 years after the end of the flood year.

 

Pressure...yes. From the fountains? What evidence do you have? You take one possibility, and then talk as if that IS the way it happened. How would I know but that the separation was post flood, and caused by something else?

That way, we can have animals moved around the planet on continents. We can have continents that were no underwater while moving as you claimed. We have no need of all fossils in the world being destroyed magically by water. We do not need to try and explain everything with the one event, one year that was the flood.

 

Well, I don't think that if we don't really know what made the mid oceanic ridge, then this has to mean it was made by fountains of the deep. I could look at that as a possible cause.

I could also look at a change in nature as somehow causing it. If the spin or orbit or axis or some such was suddenly affected, that might cause a rift, and subsequent breaking apart.

Except you made that up. Yes there was a division, but you don't know when.

I would think it was caused by God. Especially by the portals through space that brought the waters from the other side of space to earth. Also by the fountains of the deep, but we don't know much about that.

That wouldn't surprise me. What would surprise me is taking some trillions of rock hard fossils and having them all destroyed by water in one year.

 

Opinion.

If water was 15 cubits above mountains, do you think the pressure from this would destroy fossils in rocks?

A ot of water came up. How much compared to what came from the windows of heaven, we don't know.

IT was not normal rain. It was a torrential flow from above.

The stars were placed in the firmament. Water came from the other side of the firmament via windows of heaven, that were apparently some sort of...we might think of it as a wormhole, or portal. Also from below the earth as the founts opened. A fountain is a specific spout of water somewhere. I am not sure how a fountain could destroy every fossil for tens of thousands of square miles around it? Even if we said the Yucatan crater was a remnant of one fountain of the deep, that did not destroy fossils on half the planet.

 

You asked where the water came from. I told you where I believed it came from.

The stars were put in the firmament, and water was above that firmament.


"
The expression “windows of heaven” is used twice in reference to the flood (Genesis 7:11, 8:2). It is used only three times elsewhere in the Old Testament: twice in 2 Kings 7:2 and 19, referring to God's miraculous intervention in sending rain, and once in Malachi 3:10, where the phrase is used again of God intervening to pour out abundant blessings on his people. Clearly, in Genesis the expression suggests the extraordinary nature of the rainfall attending the flood. It is not a term applied to ordinary rainfall.

Genesis 1:6-8 that on the second day of creation God divided the waters that were on the Earth from the waters that He placed above the Earth when He made a “firmament” (Hebrew: raqiya, meaning “expanse”) between those waters.[5] Many have concluded that this “expanse” was the atmosphere, because God placed the birds in the expanse, suggesting that the expanse includes the atmosphere where the birds fly. This would put these waters above the atmosphere.

However, Genesis 1:20, speaking of the creation of the birds, says (literally) “let the birds fly above the ground across the face of the expanse of the heavens.”[6] This at least allows that “the expanse” may include the space beyond the atmosphere.

Dr. Russell Humphreys has argued that since Genesis 1:17 tells us that God put the sun, moon, and stars also “in the expanse of the heaven” then the expanse must at least include interstellar space, and thus the waters above the expanse of Genesis 1:7 would be beyond the stars at the edge of the universe.[7]"

https://christiananswers.net/q-aig/aig-c010.html


Ge 1:7 - And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth,

Ge 1:8 -And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.

Ge 1:14 -And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:

Ge 1:15 -And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so.


Ge 1:7 - And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so.



So we have waters above the place stars are. That is known, not opinion. The windows of heaven opened, that is known. The usage of the term windows of heaven means heavenly interference here, as the above link shows. There also had to be enough water to cover the planet, so it was not any normal source. That is a educated scholarly deduction, not just an opinion based on nothing.

Now when you say the flood broke up Rhodina, that is an opinion. When you say all fossils on earth were destroyed by the flood that is opinion. No bible basis, or basis in science.

 

They only flew on the face of the firmament, the part they flew was a part of the heavens right here on earth, in the sky. It seems obvious God put the birds and the stars in different parts of the heaven. There was water above where the stars were made.

 

No. Because when Jesus returns the earth will be a better place.

Now, one for you...if the ice age was at the same time as the Cambrian layer, why are they dated differently?