Global Flood explains Oil Deposits and Geological layers

a reply to: FarmerSimulation

It is water and atmosphere that sets this planet apart from the rest of the universe.

Plenty of water in our star system, its abundant, but it mostly exists in forms other than liquid water found on Earth.

There is water on Mars, Europa, Ganymede, Callisto, Enceladus, Titan, Ceres, and Pluto.

So it becomes a chicken or the egg hypothesis.
If all water becomes solid from magma.
Then water had to come later?

Does it?

Water didn't originally come from magma or solidify from magma.

Again water is thought to have been present during the early stages of the Earth's formation with current scientific understanding being that water was likely delivered to Earth by comets and asteroids during a period called the Late Heavy Bombardment.

The atmosphere creating a vacuum too?
Tiamat explains it better?

How so?

Just asking because the current hypothesis is that once water becomes part of rock it never can become h2o? Again?

If you could simply let the fact sink in that its not water in the traditional understanding but locked into the very structure of the minerals.

The creation story/myth talks of the Spirit hovering over the waters in the beginning.

Do tell?

Was that ringwoodite do you imagine?
Or did water come after land?

I would not care to speculate on links between imaginary entities and ringwoodite for obvious reasons.

a reply to: andy06shake



Replied mate.

a reply to: Freeborn

I got it buddy, i pretty much feel the same way, and cheers for the good wishes.

a reply to: andy06shake

See that is where I see your current paradox.
In explaining away how much water was needed for the flood you are creating very real and contradictory problems for the Earth's creation and its atmosphere.
And past that it's growth needing billions of years for life to evolve.
You need more water to be added not less water always retracting back to rock and irreversible

a reply to: FarmerSimulation

I don't see the paradox.

What part of "The Late Heavy Bombardment" period do you seem to be having an issue with, aside from the science of course?

The evolution of life on Earth is a complex process that spans billions of years.

You're drinking the same water the dinosaurs did down to the water cycle of the planet, simple as that really.

en.wikipedia.org...
www.space.com...

a reply to: ThatDamnDuckAgain

The human body produces an average of about 20,000 liters (5,283 gallons) of oil in its entire lifetime.Sep 16, 2014

a reply to: Waterglass

"sebum"?

Where does that statement come from Waterglass regarding the amount of liters?

a reply to: andy06shake

Quora for one plus many other writes:

Quora

a reply to: Waterglass

That's a lot of sebum i have to say.

I would have thought the average amount and individual produces over a lifetime would vary significantly based on certain factors like genetics, age, hormonal fluctuations, and the overall health of a person.

But is the average not more like 1.5 to 3 grams of sebum, per day, in adults?

That's still a hell of a lot of sebum produced over a lifetime depending on how long one lives all the same.

www.healthline.com...
www.sciencedirect.com...#:~:text=Sebum%20production%20is%20mainly%20influenced,cm2%20every%203%20h.&text =Sebum%20production%20less%20than%200.5,3%20h%20associated%20with%20seborrhea.

originally posted by: bobs_uruncle

If the lithosphere is 100 miles thick, which it generally is not and at 12 miles down the temperature can melt iron drills, how is the water is staying in liquid or steam form between the upper and lower mantle where the temperatures would be above 3000 degrees?

Cheers - Dave

Good question, it would exist as a supercritical fluid:



Those temperatures and pressures would make water reach its critical point. When a substance becomes a supercritical fluid, it behaves like a gas and a liquid, it's quite wild:



From what I have been reading, this is what it most likely the state of water in the mantle:

"There is a general consensus that at subduction zones, mass transfer from the subducted slab to the overlying mantle wedge is mediated by a hydrous mobile phase. However, it is under intense debate whether this phase is an aqueous fluid, hydrous silicate melt, or supercritical fluid with intermediate composition (H2O concentration in the range of 30 wt%–70 wt%). Supercritical fluids, with fluid-like viscosity and melt-like wetting and element-carrying capability, are an ideal agent for chemical transport at subduction zones."

link

It is likely that all 3 exist at various points in the mantle.

originally posted by: Waterglass

I am a Christian and I believe in God. That being said your numbers just dont add up. Heres the current situation with respect to estimates. Were talking trillions and you are referencing billions.

"The world holds around 1.56 trillion barrels in proved crude oil reserves as of 2022. This is excluding oil sands. Since 1960, there has been a marked increase in oil reserves, especially in the decade between 1960 and 1970.Dec 15, 2023"

Can you thump that as I am all for the flood theory. But...................................

Yes, a barrel of oil is 0.15 tons. multiply 1.56 trillion barrels by (0.15 tons / barrel) = 234 billion tons. This is remarkably close to the known amount of oil reserves on earth. If we assume there's as much unknown oil as there is known oil, then it pretty much perfectly matches the 500 billion tons of biomass present on the earth today.

a reply to: cooperton

Good question, it would exist as a supercritical fluid:

How many times are you going to be shown thats wrong? That image is from an engineering website...

The water you keep trying to say suddenly flooded the world to 5.5 miles above normal sea level magically turned from being incased in a diamond type structure called Ringwoodite?

a reply to: FarmerSimulation

Every planet in the solar system has an atmosphere. Water is quite common as well. Same with a few of the moons around the gas giants.

Water is one of the most common things in the universe (relatively speaking of course). Unsurprising given that Hydrogen and Oxygen are the 1st and 3rd most common elements respectively. (though it is a very, very distant third for oxygen).

originally posted by: Kurokage

How many times are you going to shown thats wrong? That image is from an engineering website...

look up "phase diagrams", it is well-know empirical science. Scary stuff for some.

The water you keep trying to say suddenly flooded the world to 5.5 miles above normal sea level magically turned from being incased in a diamond type structure called Ringwoodite?

Hydroxylated ringwoodite would be one of the ways the components of water exist in the mantle, but it makes sense both mechanistically and chemically that there are also reservoirs of regular water (aqueous solutions) and supercritical fluid:

"There is a general consensus that at subduction zones, mass transfer from the subducted slab to the overlying mantle wedge is mediated by a hydrous mobile phase. However, it is under intense debate whether this phase is an aqueous fluid, hydrous silicate melt, or supercritical fluid with intermediate composition (H2O concentration in the range of 30 wt%–70 wt%). Supercritical fluids, with fluid-like viscosity and melt-like wetting and element-carrying capability, are an ideal agent for chemical transport at subduction zones."
link

a reply to: cooperton

Again thats you making assumptions based on your belief that water came flooding up through the Earth to flood the world, because without it it's another nail in the coffin of the ridiculous myth of a flood 5.5 miles above sea level.

ADDED
You seem to agree with the science when you can discard the bits that prove your creaonist pesudo science to be false. Thats not how the science works.

originally posted by: Kurokage
a reply to: cooperton

Again thats you making assumptions based on your belief that water came flooding up through the Earth to flood the world, because without it it's another nail in the coffin of the redicoulous myth of a flood 5.5 miles above sea level

No that's me quoting a scientific journal lol. You're just exposing your dogmatism by trying to deny everything I say, even thought most of what I say is verbatim from a scientific paper.

a reply to: cooperton

I added a line to show what I meant.

You seem to choose which part of the science you want to follow. Just like your belief in the mantle but not how aquatic fossils are found atop mountains.

originally posted by: Kurokage
ADDED
You seem to agree with the science when you can discard the bits that prove your creaonist pesudo science to be false. Thats not how the science works.

You are projecting. You're the one biased about evolutionary theory, disregarding any evidence that shows it's not plausible.

Science is a ever-progressing field, but you want it to be stuck on the mutant ape theory forever. Speaking of ever-progressing science, it is now being accepted by geologists that supercritical fluid plays a crucial role in the mantle. This article is from 2023:

"Our research presents a method that more accurately determines the quantitative composition of ultrahigh-pressure (UHP) fluid [high H2O (~40 wt.%) and solute (~60 wt.%) contents] released by a slab during deep subduction compared with that detailed in previous studies. The data provide important information for understanding the characteristics of UHP fluids, especially supercritical fluids. Supercritical fluids with high dissolved contents of carbon (2 wt.%) and sulfur (3 wt.%) released during deep subduction could cause efficient migration of carbon and sulfur from slabs. This improves their recycling efficiency in the subduction zone, playing a vital role in the deep cycling of these elements. The contribution of supercritical fluids to the deep carbon and sulfur cycle may have been significantly underestimated previously."

Look at that, my prediction of supercritical water being in the mantle was shown to be correct.

"According to 3D modeling and calculations, the calculated average composition of the captured fluids can be estimated as 22.5 wt.% SiO2, 13.2 wt.% CaO, 7.0 wt.% SO3, 5.5 wt.% CO2, 3.4 wt.% Al2O3, 4.5 wt.% MgO, 1.3 wt.% TFe2O3, 0. 6 wt.% BaO, and 41.6 wt.% H2O, with trace amounts of Li, Na, and K. As shown in Table 1, the reconstructed fluid composition of MFIs is between a hydrous melt and an aqueous fluid and it is consistent with the composition of supercritical fluid reported by Ni et al. (1), i.e., the concentrations of solute range from 30 to 70 wt.%."

link

gg

a reply to: cooperton
Seems like you chose to ignore the point.

If I'm not mistaken, the whole "there isn't enough water" was when some flood believers said the melted polar caps would have caused the flood.

That seems to have morphed into this water in the mantle thing, but what you still can't explain is how this water flooded the surface.

So, sure, you can argue there is a lot of water, regardless of state, but you can't prove it just rushed out unto the surface to back up your story.

a reply to: daskakik

Cooperton's entire premise is ridiculous. Even if water emerged catastrophically from the mantle, it didn't remain on the surface long enough to create the pressure necessary to condense carbonaceous material into petroleum.

In addition, the water in the mantle is primarily SALINE i.e. salt water. Saline is HEAVIER than most crude oil deposits. Therefore, THE WATER SINKS BELOW the crude oil deposits if there are any.

A variety of organic material settled in lakes and the sea. The conditions were ANOXIC i.e. no oxygen. The organic material did not decompose as it would on the surface. The organic deposits form kerogen under these conditions. As the material accumulates, pressure and temperature increase. Temperature can increase from the chemical reactions themselves or heat derived from radioactive isotopes in the ground. Catagenesis is a slow, first order reaction. The organic material itself provides the components for the reaction. No outside reactants are required.

Stop listening to Cooperton. The guy is a crackpot.