Global Flood explains Oil Deposits and Geological layers

a reply to: FarmerSimulation
Seems like a dumbed down description.

It seems all planets have a tilt. Not sure it would have to do with silt from a flood or anything like that.

Another interesting thought is that it might not be top heavy, we just got used to seeing the north pole on top of maps and globes but maybe that is the bottom.

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: FarmerSimulation
Seems like a dumbed down description.

It seems all planets have a tilt. Not sure it would have to do with silt from a flood or anything like that.

Another interesting thought is that it might not be top heavy, we just got used to seeing the north pole on top of maps and globes but maybe that is the bottom.

certainly you are not looking at picture of Earth to form this unscientific opinion.
It is actually common knowledge in the scientific community.

So what did the North pole look like when you observed it?
If only we had a picture of Earth instead of artists depictions and cgi images.
NASA admits this is so.

a reply to: FarmerSimulation
Like I said, it doesn't say top heavy acorn, it says what we call the northern hemisphere might be denser. I have no problem with that.

You know you said earlier you go where the data takes you, but you actually have a destination in mind, so this bit of data "takes you" to silt from the flood.

Me, it doesn't take me anywhere, especially since all the other planets in the solar system seem to have some degree of tilt and I don't know if there even were floods there to cause a silt shift.

a reply to: cooperton

"There are 1.56 trillion barrels of oil estimated to be in earth

You provide a link to that and I will boost your Total Karma Score with a rating. Thats all I need.

originally posted by: Kurokage

And thats not going to happen considering you can't show a single piece of evidence of how fish could look for a fresh water stream amongst a deludge full of ash, mud, rotting vegetation and a number of other factors. No fish, either fresh water or marine would survive that, let alone merrily swimming around in it avoiding salinity??

The total biomass on earth is about 500 billion tons, whereas the total mass of the ocean is 1,450,000,000 billion tons. The debris from all the foliage on earth would be a drop in the bucket compared to the volume of water on the planet during the flood.

It's straight-forward math. The debris would not be an issue

You keep insisting that it's water in the mantle when it's been shown it's not.

Lol I could use this clip for pretty much every one of your claims, it's perfect:



Here, in their own words, water in the liquid form, in an easy-to-understand diagram of mineral and water contents in the mantle:

link

It contains everything I was saying regarding the presence of water:



They estimate the weight of water in these layers to be around 40% of the total weight:

"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]"

a reply to: andy06shake

Ah, so the CO2 Greenies are saying COWS in publick when they are actually referring to the two legged beasties ~ cows so in esscence they are being politically correct?

So many here on earth cant handle life so we use drugs, boos, food, children, sex and / or other non sanctioned and approved by all religions santioned medical devices.

Thats a tough sell

They should put supercritical fluids in the drinking water I reckon.

originally posted by: Ohanka
They should put supercritical fluids in the drinking water I reckon.

They were going to, but it wasn’t necessary.

I’ll see myself out.

originally posted by: Degradation33
a reply to: cooperton

Satan demands it.

Ahh the father of lies, this all makes sense now with everything you say.

a reply to: Waterglass

Ah, so the CO2 Greenies are saying COWS in publick when they are actually referring to the two legged beasties ~ cows so in esscence they are being politically correct?

Suppose the word does have different connotations depending on where you hail from.

Human-wise, saying it down South is like an offhanded profanity, whereas calling a lady such here in bonny Scotland would be considered rather poor form and would be apt to end poorly.

So many here on earth cant handle life so we use drugs, boos, food, children, sex and / or other non sanctioned and approved by all religions santioned medical devices.

People use drugs to escape reality and/or the pain of existence.....also for recreational purposes.

Get your weans into PC and they won't be able to afford drugs, or something along those lines.

As to religion well each to their own there, I'm on the fence.

Now where tough sells are concerned, is that not just how humanity rolls?

It is deep silt in the arctic circle where all the woolley mammoths are found with tropical vegetation in their stomach.
I believe acorn shaped better describes the top heavy silt and ice.
Egg shaped is not descriptive enough.

And my description is from modern science, not creationist science.
It is what it is.

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: FarmerSimulation
Like I said, it doesn't say top heavy acorn, it says what we call the northern hemisphere might be denser. I have no problem with that.

You know you said earlier you go where the data takes you, but you actually have a destination in mind, so this bit of data "takes you" to silt from the flood.

Me, it doesn't take me anywhere, especially since all the other planets in the solar system seem to have some degree of tilt and I don't know if there even were floods there to cause a silt shift.

a reply to: FarmerSimulation
But what you quoted doesn't say acorn shaped or mention silt. Also, silt isn't particularly dense, somewhere between sand and clay.
It says "Large amounts of land mass and ice sheets in the Northern Hemisphere make Earth top-heavy."

Top heavy also doesn't describe shape, just weight distribution.

I have no idea why you are bringing mammoths up again.

a reply to: cooperton

The total biomass on earth is about 500 billion tons, whereas the total mass of the ocean is 1,450,000,000 billion tons. The debris from all the foliage on earth would be a drop in the bucket compared to the volume of water on the planet during the flood.

And again that shows you don't understand the subject you're pretending to know. You need to research the sudden effects on fish. You're forgeting that all life on Earth is now dead because of this magical flood from the smallest to the largest, insects and smaller to elephants and bigger with everything in between. Add to that all the decaying flora and then calculate the total organic carbon now suddenly mixed into the ocean. Then you also have to add all this volcanic ash and mud you claimed was layed down all at once to form these sedimentary layers. Amongst all of that you seem to think all the fish are going to be swimming around merily like a pixar cartoon!
You're wrong on so many levels it's now becoming silly.

I hope your little video made you feel all warm and fuzzy inside because your ignorance and denial is very amusing.

Like I said, if I believed in the devil, I'm sure he would be very proud of you losing all reason and spreading lies for him.