• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Hydroplate Theory

Status
Not open for further replies.

church mouse guy

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Dr. Walt Brown, an M.I.T. educated scientist and engineer and a graduate of West Point, on his website of Center for Scientific Creation, has posted a eleven-minute video of how the flood of Noah happened. I am reluctant to summarize the theory for fear of misrepresenting it so I will ask if someone else would be so kind as to post a synopsis please?

Here is the video, and there are other free videos on the website:



Website address: Center for Scientific Creation | In the Beginning: Compelling Evidence for Creation and the Flood
 

church mouse guy

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
VERY interesting!!! Gonna have to watch this one again & again & ----- !

Yes, I have watched it many times myself.

Genesis 7:11 (KJV) In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month, the same day were all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened.

If the earth's surface was stretched over and over like a balloon because of the tides acting upon the fountains of the deep, then it seems that God planned the flood before the universe was created, doesn't it?
 

HankD

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Yes, I have watched it many times myself.

Genesis 7:11 (KJV) In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month, the same day were all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened.

If the earth's surface was stretched over and over like a balloon because of the tides acting upon the fountains of the deep, then it seems that God planned the flood before the universe was created, doesn't it?
Of course He did :)

Thanks CMG. Excellent.

HankD
 

tyndale1946

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Of course He did :)

Thanks CMG. Excellent.

HankD

I looked at the one that was posted by CMG... Excellent!... I'm going to check out the longer six part version later over 2hr and 40 min long... Which I am sure will be way, way, way more EXCELLENT... I'll return later and let you all know... Brother Glen:)
 

just-want-peace

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
I looked at the one that was posted by CMG... Excellent!... I'm going to check out the longer six part version later over 2hr and 40 min long... Which I am sure will be way, way, way more EXCELLENT... I'll return later and let you all know... Brother Glen:)

Just started the longer version, and am enthralled so far. Gotta listen "hard" though!:Thumbsup:Laugh
 

dad1

Member
Dr. Walt Brown, an M.I.T. educated scientist and engineer and a graduate of West Point, on his website of Center for Scientific Creation, has posted a eleven-minute video of how the flood of Noah happened. I am reluctant to summarize the theory for fear of misrepresenting it so I will ask if someone else would be so kind as to post a synopsis please?

Here is the video, and there are other free videos on the website:



Website address: Center for Scientific Creation | In the Beginning: Compelling Evidence for Creation and the Flood

There are problems with the theory. I have heard some say that the heat generated by falling water would steam to death life on earth, and also that the friction of fast moving continents is a heat problem.

I started off years ago looking into creation issues reading that book. It does have a lot of valid and interesting points, such as that many comets originated from earth.

It was thinking about these things that led me to conclude that the nature in the past was probably different. So Walt made a good attempt to explain it all using physics. But I don't think anyone can explain all the differences using current laws. I also don't think Walt could win a debate with a seasoned scientific expert.
 

church mouse guy

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
There are problems with the theory. I have heard some say that the heat generated by falling water would steam to death life on earth, and also that the friction of fast moving continents is a heat problem.

I started off years ago looking into creation issues reading that book. It does have a lot of valid and interesting points, such as that many comets originated from earth.

It was thinking about these things that led me to conclude that the nature in the past was probably different. So Walt made a good attempt to explain it all using physics. But I don't think anyone can explain all the differences using current laws. I also don't think Walt could win a debate with a seasoned scientific expert.

Walt is a seasoned scientist. He went to West Point and taught in the Air Force Academy. If the water shot twenty miles in space, it would lose heat and fall as snow and ice, which is what it did.
 

church mouse guy

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
A more recent explanation is that the flood set off widespread volcanic eruptions which filled the atmosphere with dust and reflected the heat of the sun back into space. The warm oceans warmed from the water in the fountains of the deep caused evaporation. The rainfall became snowfall and thus began the Ice Age.

Setting the Stage for an Ice Age
 

dad1

Member
Walt is a seasoned scientist. He went to West Point and taught in the Air Force Academy. If the water shot twenty miles in space, it would lose heat and fall as snow and ice, which is what it did.

Well, apparently men of science disagree. For example..

"In his reviews of Brown's book at Amazon.com, physicist Gerard Jellison calculated that the mass of particles and water vapor expelled from earth in order to explain the comets, asteroids, and meteoroids in our solar system would be over 100 times greater than the earth's mass (Jellison, 2009a). He further calculated that if only 0.001% of the mass and energy of the eruptions wound up in the Earth's atmosphere, the atmosphere would have been raised by 3000 degrees F! Of course, Jellison was being very generous to Brown, since even leaving only 1% of the heat on earth would be thoroughly untenable. After all, Brown's theory holds that many cubic miles of super hot, sediment laden water gushed through miles more of solid rock, then entire oceans, then miles more atmosphere. Even if his proposed forces allowed that, could not occur without huge amounts of friction, turbulence, and steam release, and condensation on Earth--all involving massive amounts of energy and heat left on Earth. Indeed, according to Brown's own descriptions, diagrams, and videos, the eruptions or "jets" did not shoot up in tight vertical spouts or planes (even if they did, massive friction and steam release would occur), but spewed out violently both upward and outward as violent "fountains," with a lot of water and debris falling back to earth as "extreme rain." Meanwhile, also based on Brown's own descriptions, after the initial "rupture phase" the subsequent "undulating," "crashing", "sinking" and "sliding" of continent-sized hydroplates would have produced enormous amounts of heat and friction as continent sized plates sped across the entire planet within weeks, and entire mountains were pushed up in "hours." Still more heat, which Brown himself calls "massive" would have been produced from widespread volcanic activity and magma outpourings during these events. In view of all this, the energy and heat left on earth would be orders of magnitude more than 0.001%, which again, would be more than lethal to all life on earth."
Walter Brown's Hydroplate Model Doesn't Hold Water


The problem is in using the physics and nature of today in trying to model any theory of the past. Everything becomes easy if we simply assume a different nature. No friction problems...no need for all the water almost to have come from under the earth rather than from above, no need for all comets in the solar system to have come from earth...etc etc.
 

church mouse guy

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
So what are you saying? Are you saying that there was no Noah's Flood? Are you saying that Scripture is wrong? Or are you saying that you are not a Young Earth Creationist?
 

dad1

Member
So what are you saying? Are you saying that there was no Noah's Flood? Are you saying that Scripture is wrong? Or are you saying that you are not a Young Earth Creationist?
No. There was a flood. The earth is young. The bible is God's word and Genesis is true as true could be. I am saying that although Walt made a valiant effort to find out why science was wrong, he failed. The reason I feel he failed is because there IS no explanation using physics of today and the nature of today.
 

church mouse guy

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
No. There was a flood. The earth is young. The bible is God's word and Genesis is true as true could be. I am saying that although Walt made a valiant effort to find out why science was wrong, he failed. The reason I feel he failed is because there IS no explanation using physics of today and the nature of today.

1. How old do you think that the earth is?

2. What do you think caused the flood?

3. Do you believe that the flood was global?

4. How do you yourself know that there is no explanation using the physics of today and the nature of today what happened 4,500 years ago?
 
Last edited:

dad1

Member
1. How old do you think that the earth is?
Roughly 6000.
2. What do you think caused the flood?
God. It seems like He opened the windows of heaven to bring water from the other side of the stars somehow. Perhaps a bit like what science calls a wormhole. Also the founts of the deep.
3. Do you believe that the flood was global?
Yep, only life on the ark survived (except for sea life)
4. How do you yourself know that there is no explanation using the physics of today and the nature of today what happened 4,500 years ago?

I've looked into the various explanations both of science and creationists. There are real evidences that need to be taken into account. Walt did that to some extent, for example, he dealt with a real separation of continents, that science knows happened. But he did not deal well with the plethora of implications a rapid move would have made using physics of today.
 

church mouse guy

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
I think that Hydroplate Theory holds up okay. It explains how the water underground broke free and caused the flood and broke up the land mass into continents. I linked above that volcanic activity put a cloud of dust over the earth, holding the temperature down and leading to the Ice Age. If I recall correctly, the Ark Encounter in Kentucky had an exhibit of Hydroplate Theory so I would say that Brown's theory is mainstream.
 

church mouse guy

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
It's curious to me that Noah's Flood triggered the Ice Age, effectively closing off large areas of the earth to man as if God was directing where he wanted humans to settle first. Indiana, for example, was covered in ice, as you know, but now is a rich agricultural area with the beautiful Wabash valley.
 

dad1

Member
It's curious to me that Noah's Flood triggered the Ice Age, effectively closing off large areas of the earth to man as if God was directing where he wanted humans to settle first. Indiana, for example, was covered in ice, as you know, but now is a rich agricultural area with the beautiful Wabash valley.

The thing is that this was (in imaginary science years) some 10,000 years ago. It depends on where we thin the flood happened in the geologic column. My opinion is that it was somewhere around the KT layer. In their imaginary years that was some 70,000,000 years ago. So the recent ice age probably was not directly caused by the flood year. The ice age was long after the separation of continents. It makes sense that the animals off the ark who got around the world got there on the rapidly moved continent they were on, rather than swimming, hitching a ride on a canoe..etc etc. It has been a long time since I read the Hydroplate theory book, but I think it mentioned that the Mexico Chixibub crater may have been a remnant fountain of the deep? If so we should remember that that is also dated (in science imaginary years) to around the time of the KT.

It is true, though that God used the separated continents, and ice age and other geological features in directing man.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top