Global Flood explains Oil Deposits and Geological layers

originally posted by: daskakik

originally posted by: FarmerSimulation
The biggest scientific problem you have for your side is in tracing rh- through the dna haplogroups.
It all began in the caucusus. Ot is incontrovertable. Right to where the oldest winery in the world is.

Nope, I honestly don't care about rh-, that is you bag, man.

Not sure how a winery from over a thousand years before Noah proves the flood story. If anything it shows people were doing their thing and some never stopped, due to a world flood or anything else.

You did watch the video.
Good for you.
You gained some credibility points with me.
You can see where dating things get important even a few hundred years here and there.
Very important when you see how much you pigeon hole proofs within timelines and time constraints instead of real science where you test your own hypothesis by attempting to design experiments to disprove it instead of designing polemics to disprove others.
The thing is your side is the side that gets all buttons hurt and angry. And we have the most to lose in faith.
Granted there are some that get paid and have jobs, and grants to answer for.
I can see the reason for anger there.

originally posted by: Phantom42338

originally posted by: FarmerSimulation

originally posted by: Phantom42338
a reply to: FarmerSimulation

If you knew about soil microbiology, you would know some chemistry and obviously you don't. Your comments give you away.
The organic byproducts of decomposition should be a no-brainer for you. You should understand the role of oxygen in decomposition reactions. You may grow worms, but you're no vermiculturist by profession otherwise you would put the lid on Cooperton's ridiculous hypothesis.

You're into theoretical science? What the hell does that mean? Can you write a set of equations for Cooperton's flood hypothesis? A lab technician is a SPECIALIST. They know what role they play inside and out. If they're in a molecular biology lab, they know molecular biology techniques. If they're in an organic chemistry lab, they know organic chemistry inside and out.

There's a lot of people around here, including myself, who have spent most of their adult life in laboratories. You, on the other hand, don't have a clue what goes on in a lab or you wouldn't make such a stupid statement:

I am way more into the theoretical science aspect than lab work or lab technician.
I can read and think

I think you're just another phony baloney like Cooperton.

Yawn.
If you say so

Thank you for proving my point. Next...................

I was going to throw you a bone in an edit but since it was the bottom of the page I will post it here.
Theoretical science.
Now that they have outlawed the sale of chemical fertilizers the whole world is working on solutions with nitrogen being one of the big ones.
I and 2 other parties are working on this from different directions.
One guy is using a big transformer.
Another friend, who is Victor Shoenberger reincarnated(his spirit) is doing his amazing stuff with water.
I am looking to do it with manure.
And the entire world is working on the same thing.
Until someone figures it out I am going back to how they have done it for millenia except with worms I do it on steroids.
When I figure out how to get sulfur that is scalable it's game on.
Food can once again be our medicine.
The sulfur used in the recent past derived from tar and petrochemical byproducts is not what our bodies recognize as beneficial and utilized but instead screws up our entire system.
I need to do this by the 10's of thousands of acres as well as backyard gardens.

a reply to: FarmerSimulation
Nobody, except for you, seems angry here.

Very important when you see how much you pigeon hole proofs within timelines and time constraints instead of real science where you test your own hypothesis by attempting to design experiments to disprove it instead of designing polemics to disprove others.

To be honest I see you pigeon hole things to what happened around the mediterranean and just cast aside all the things going on in the rest of the planet, like chinese, australian aboriginal and mesoamerican cultures.

Sure OP mentions some of them but only because they can twist some of their flood myths into their biblical world flood theory. Cherry pick that one story they have and throw away whatever else they say about the origin of earth or mankind. Don't even bother to mention that they had agriculture and small but still organized civilizations and had learned to work clay and stone. They were all just numbskulls until the rh- learned them.

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: FarmerSimulation
Nobody, except for you, seems angry here.

Very important when you see how much you pigeon hole proofs within timelines and time constraints instead of real science where you test your own hypothesis by attempting to design experiments to disprove it instead of designing polemics to disprove others.

To be honest I see you pigeon hole things to what happened around the mediterranean and just cast aside all the things going on in the rest of the planet, like chinese, australian aboriginal and mesoamerican cultures.

Sure OP mentions some of them but only because they can twist some of their flood myths into their biblical world flood theory. Cherry pick that one story they have and throw away whatever else they say about the origin of earth or mankind.
Don't even bother to mention that they had agriculture and small but still organized civilizations and had learned to work clay and stone. They were all just numbskulls until the rh- learned them.

We have discussed China.
Australia is nothing I have worked on.
Mesoamerica.
Yeah we can go there.
They have flood myths, correct?
And Quetzalcoatl. He was blonde blue eyed according to their legends.
Did you know that the Amazon rain forest with its soil that is something like 12 foot deep and is called terra pretax and is this deep dark fertile soil?

And that they have recently discovered is the overgrowth from man made agriculture that was sectioned and farmed?

Guess who brought that there?

Terra pretax.
That stuff fascinates me.
We need to spend more of our energies creating food forests.
My humanitarian project is to represent the deserts using and growing industrial hemp.
And food forests. (I just now added that last part.)

And I am not pigeon holed in the caucusus or middle east.
I have been looking at Canaan and thought for years thought everything migrated from there and into Eastern Europe.
I know that is wrong now.
It has been proven.
It started in Armenia and went to Iran and out from there and into the fertile crescent.
Modern anthropology is destroying the old models and we now have enough to establish and correct almost every countries timelines.

For instance.
It is being postulated that Abrm is Anu and Esau and Jacob are enki and enlil.
I am not sure on this one yet but it sure is interesting and can fill in some blanks.
But not sure, not sure. I dunno man, that opens up a big can-o-worms.

Just mentioning that is going to ruffle feathers on my side of the aisle.

originally posted by: FarmerSimulation
We have discussed China.

And they had no interruption in their history from a flood.

Australia is nothing I have worked on.

Well, they had no interruption in their history from a flood either.

Mesoamerica.
Yeah we can go there.
They have flood myths, correct?
And Quetzalcoatl. He was blonde blue eyed according to their legends.

My legends, and no, those blonde blue eyed images were just the ones approved by the church; nudge, nudge, wink, wink.

Did you know that the Amazon rain forest with its soil that is something like 12 foot deep and is called terra pretax and is this deep dark fertile soil?

Yes, and that was something before Noah. Nobody knows how they formed but it seems people, even if they were not Hyksos, recognized the potential.

Guess who brought that there?

Nobody. If someone had brought it there, like your hyksos buddies, it would be seen in other places as well.

originally posted by: Phantom42338
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.

Yes it could have. A lab was able to produce petroleum from pressure in under an hour. The flood waters were present for far longer than that, plus the immense formation of geological layers pressing down on the organic matter.

"From eons to hours: new process can pressure-cook algae into crude oil. A new breakthrough in biofuels production allows researchers to turn living algae into crude oil ready for processing -- and it only takes less than an hour."

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.

First off, being "HEAVIER" does not matter regarding what will float or sink, it is DENSITY that determines what will float or sink. This should be common knowledge for a chemist, which makes me densely suspicious of your claims. Regardless, yes, oil is less dense than salt water and will float. But in the mode I described in the OP, Oil deposits would be trapped in geological layers, it would not have been able to float because it was completely covered by the newly forming layers that were deposited from the massive flood waters.

Stop listening to Cooperton. The guy is a crackpot.

Remember when you asked where a salt water creature would go during the global flood? good times, good times.

originally posted by: Ohanka
a reply to: cooperton

Do you actually read and perhaps more importantly understand the papers you cite?

When you are familiar with the terminology it is easy to read.

originally posted by: Kurokage

And I see you're still stuck on the mantle and superfical..I mean supercritcal water!! There isn't enough to flood the world over 5.5 miles above sea level, its stuck in the composition of things like ringwoodite.

Take some time to understand what this is saying. It is an article from this year discussing the present of supercritical water in the mantle:

"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."


"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


As shown in their own words there is plenty of water in these layers. anywhere from 30-70% of the weight of these layers is water.

So now you're in a conundrum, do you admit you were wrong and that there is supercritical water in these layers? Or do you deny empirical science?

originally posted by: cooperton
Oil deposits are known to be trapped in geological layers, it would not have been able to float because it was completely covered by the newly forming layers.

What newly forming layers?

You have god pouring water through a hole in the firmament and some water bubbling from the mantle, which would be below everything else. 

ETA. The pressure cooker mentioned in that process is most likely more watertight than any geological layer you can think of.

originally posted by: daskakik
What newly forming layers?

You have god pouring water through a hole in the firmament and some water bubbling from the mantle, which would be below everything else. 

ETA. The pressure cooker mentioned in that process is most likely more watertight than any geological layer you can think of.

The waters from below were likely bursting forth, not a simple bubbling. This would have caused intense water currents, especially given there was a storm going on too for 40 days and 40 nights. Vast amounts of matter would have been moved. I showed earlier this video of how a small flood creek can move massive amounts of mud and boulders:



(at 15 seconds)

Now imagine this on a global scale, the entire face of the earth would undergo dramatic changes.

originally posted by: cooperton
The waters from below were likely bursting forth, not a simple bubbling.

Ok, and these bursting waters created pressure cookers how?

Also, crude oil is lighter than fresh water and even less dense than salt water. For that matter dead animals, leaves, sticks and even logs/trees are lighter than water.

How did any of that end up beneath these newly forming geographical layers you just made up?

ETA: I also got to say I like the flip-flopping, when you want a freshwater layer on the top of your flood things are slow and steady and when you want things mixed up you have waters bursting forth.

Oh, there is STILL just one more thing.

[Specimen is from the Joggins Formation (Pennsylvanian), Cumberland Basin, Nova Scotia]

Remember this? I thought it was a dyke (mainly for trollish entendre reasons) instead of an upright fossil?

*polystrate fossil is NOT a geological term

As it turns out it's part of The Joggins Formation..


It is part of the Cumberland Group of geological formations, which extends from the early Namurian stage to the Westphalian stage of the Carboniferous period.[11] The deposit represents a time when the region was dominated by a tropical rainforest, and consists of an enormous quantity of sedimentary rock. This material was deposited by rivers and flood water moving northwards, leaving behind sediment that subsided between two fault blocks: the Cobequid Mountains and Caledonia Mountain (present-day Caledonia Mountain, New Brunswick), both of which were active in the Carboniferous


CARBONIFEROUS PERIOD = 358 to 298 MYA

The world looked like this:

How can you assert this was formed by a flood 4500 years ago?

Better yet, how can you assert these formations were made 4500 years when the 'mantle water', because you won't acknowledge how it exists, suddenly flooded to the earth?

And yet you're harping HOW this water can exist, like THAT ACTUALLY SAVES you from the pinnacle of "Fail Troll Argumentum."

This is a main exhibit of evidence you provide, yet you failed to acknowledge the geological epoch in which it was formed, and continue to avoid answering to this.

Why?

Don't want to get into on North American orogeny or something?
Deny the Carboniferous Period existed?

a reply to: cooperton

You idiot:

First off, being "HEAVIER" does not matter regarding what will float or sink, it is DENSITY that determines what will float or sink

Oils, by contrast, are nonpolar, and as a result they’re not attracted to the polarity of water molecules. In fact, oils are hydrophobic, or “water fearing.” Instead of being attracted to water molecules, oil molecules are repelled by them. As a result, when you add oil to a cup of water the two don’t mix with each other. Because oil is less dense than water, it will always float on top of water, creating a surface layer of oil. You might have seen this on streets after a heavy rain—some water puddles will have a coating of oil floating on the

Would someone please get the hook. This idiot doesn't understand the difference between volume, molecular weight and density.

originally posted by: daskakik

originally posted by: FarmerSimulation
We have discussed China.

And they had no interruption in their history from a flood.

Australia is nothing I have worked on.

Well, they had no interruption in their history from a flood either.

Mesoamerica.
Yeah we can go there.
They have flood myths, correct?
And Quetzalcoatl. He was blonde blue eyed according to their legends.

My legends, and no, those blonde blue eyed images were just the ones approved by the church; nudge, nudge, wink, wink.

Did you know that the Amazon rain forest with its soil that is something like 12 foot deep and is called terra pretax and is this deep dark fertile soil?

Yes, and that was something before Noah. Nobody knows how they formed but it seems people, even if they were not Hyksos, recognized the potential.

Guess who brought that there?

Nobody. If someone had brought it there, like your hyksos buddies, it would be seen in other places as well.

How absurd.
Show me a here and why Queztacatl is a catholic thing.
How ridiculous.

And no.
not before Noah.
You need receipts.The agriculture in the rain forest base is only hundreds of years old before the overgrowth took over. You know the Aztecs. They were master agriculturists.
They came long after Noah.
I have done little research on mesoamerica outside of looking at Mormon lore and if it matches up.
Quetzalcoatl is only a few thousand years ago.

This is a big shift from my focus around the Levant.
When I dig into Atlantis is when I look into mesoamerica with any fervor.
Probably find similar stuff with Australia when I study there.
But they do have flood myths in mesoamerica.
Atlantis, the great civilization and its mighty men fell in one day when it sank into mud.
Sepehr shows it was most likely in the Atlantic and reached not to far after leaving through the pillars of Hercules from the mediterranean.
It was said to be inaccessible for years because of miles of mud.
The mayans and Inca and Aztecs look to be remnants from Atalantis.
Australian aborigines as well.
How that reconciles with the flood myths I cannot tell you.
I am leaving some things open till I know more. And I have not done my due diligence on it all yet.
My initial feels is their flood myths will be about Atlantis. I am talking about those that are not under obvious Jesuit influence as we both agree on.

I can say this though.
Central America had bustling and densely populated cities in Columbus era in the 16th century.
It is estimated to be about 20 million people. Cortez did a lot of harm.
Remnants of Atlantis in South and Central America.
Remnants of red headed Tartarian giants in North America.
Interesting study there when I get to it.
The white blue eyed blonde Indians from Canada/Washington pacific coast are interesting. The Cherokee are really interesting.
I have done some work with the Paiutes which ties deeply into area51 is interesting.

Right now my efforts are finishing the stuff we have been talking about which is the beginning of it all.

a reply to: Phantom42338

Would someone please get the hook. This idiot doesn't understand the difference between volume, molecular weight and density.

He understands what's convenient for the claim.

I would pay to watch him argue this though.

The water in the mantle transition zone, is mostly free floating, separate from other minerals, in supercritical form, and can be sent to the surface through convective processes driven by a pressure change in the earths core. This process can drain the MTZ instanteously and flood the earth to the top of Mt. Everest. It is responsible for the oil and carbon deposits and other geological sedimentary layers, like those in The Joggins Formation of the Northern Appalachian Mountains.

...to a group of geologists.

originally posted by: FarmerSimulation
How absurd.
Show me a here and why Queztacatl is a catholic thing.
How ridiculous.

I didn't say Queztacatl was a catholic thing, I said the blond blue eyed depictions are, just like the blond blue eyed depictions of Jesus, or Yahshua if you prefer.

You know the Aztecs. They were master agriculturists.
They came long after Noah.
I have done little research on mesoamerica outside of looking at Mormon lore and if it matches up.
Quetzalcoatl is only a few thousand years ago.

There were people before the Aztecs, like the Olmec.

There are even signs of people before them. Heck I have seen studies that say horses were american and travelled across the bering strait and became extinct in the americas until the spanish brought them back.

I see you skirted the Chinese, Australian Aboriginal and Indian history that shows no interruption.

ETA. By the way, agricultural practices in the americas, in many parts of the world actually, predate Noah and whatever rh- offspring he made have had. No they didn't use horses but those are not the only beasts of burden.

ETAM: If Terra pretax was an rh- thing why isn't it seen outside the amazon? You want to claim this "special group" taught the rest, why isn't present in the old world?

originally posted by: Phantom42338
a reply to: cooperton

You idiot:

"Oils, by contrast, are nonpolar, and as a result they’re not attracted to the polarity of water molecules. In fact, oils are hydrophobic, or “water fearing.” Instead of being attracted to water molecules, oil molecules are repelled by them. As a result, when you add oil to a cup of water the two don’t mix with each other. Because oil is less dense than water, it will always float on top of water, creating a surface layer of oil. You might have seen this on streets after a heavy rain—some water puddles will have a coating of oil floating on the"

Would someone please get the hook. This idiot doesn't understand the difference between volume, molecular weight and density.

lolol I love when you double down and don't even know the discrepancy I am referring to. You said "HEAVIER", but whether something sinks or floats is not dependent on weight or "heaviness", it is dependent on density. The fact you still don't even know what I'm referring to shows you're definitely irrelevant as a chemist. Even better, you got 3 stars for your comment, showing that everyone in this thread is blindly starring things they have no idea about. The irony is so rich i love it. Thanks again for yet another Christmas gift phantom! Here's your original comment:

originally posted by: Phantom42338
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.

As I said in my prior post, it is true that oil is less DENSE than saline water and will float on water (if not covered by a mound of mud), but your inability to refer to the correct reason why oil floats shows you are not fit for scientific discourse.

a reply to: cooperton
They also said "dense" you dunce.

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: cooperton
They also said "dense" you dunce.

After I corrected them, you blind fanboi

originally posted by: daskakik

originally posted by: FarmerSimulation
How absurd.
Show me a here and why Queztacatl is a catholic thing.
How ridiculous.

I didn't say Queztacatl was a catholic thing, I said the blond blue eyed depictions are, just like the blond blue eyed depictions of Jesus, or Yahshua if you prefer.

You know the Aztecs. They were master agriculturists.
They came long after Noah.
I have done little research on mesoamerica outside of looking at Mormon lore and if it matches up.
Quetzalcoatl is only a few thousand years ago.

There were people before the Aztecs, like the Olmec.

There are even signs of people before them. Heck I have seen studies that say horses were american and travelled across the bering strait and became extinct in the americas until the spanish brought them back.

I see you skirted the Chinese, Australian Aboriginal and Indian history that shows no interruption.

ETA. By the way, agricultural practices in the americas, in many parts of the world actually, predate Noah and whatever rh- offspring he made have had. No they didn't use horses but those are not the only beasts of burden.

ETAM: If Terra pretax was an rh- thing why isn't it seen outside the amazon? You want to claim this "special group" taught the rest, why isn't present in the old world?

You are losing me in some stream of conscious thing where you are jarbling up everything.
I have no idea what you are on about.
Quetzalcoatl needs a deep dive from me before I can tie this blonde blue eyed character in with the Noah group.
There are edomites and canaanites that fit the bill in history.
There is intermingling.

I might flip the script on you since the winged feathered serpent is describing seraphim.

So far I lean towards more of an Atlantis connection and outside my scope of understanding till I do some due diligence.

You can get away with a 10 minute study after a Google but for me that is way too inadequate to form an opinion.
Oh yeah.
I mentioned Aztec because I was referring to Quetzalcoatl