On facebook I got the opportunity to share my arguments for the crystalline canopy theory. creation scientist and apologist Jonathon Sarfati. Sarfati is a critic of the various canopy theories. Although he is a tremendous apologist and his ministry has been helpful to me in the past. So I had my work cut out for me. especially not being a scientist myself. Here is the thread also a member of the FB group "Jesus is the lamb" participated.
.Jonathan David Sarfati My paper http://creation.com/flood-models-biblical-realism analyses lots of flood models and finds the canopy wanting both biblically and scientifically.
Saturday at 5:24pm · Like..
Jonathan David Sarfati The trouble with Hovind is that he's a one-man band. Organizations like CMI have many scientists, who provide checks and balances, in line with the biblical "safety in a multitude of counsellors". http://creation.com/maintaining-creationist-integrity-response-to-kent-hovind
Saturday at 5:25pm · Like..
Jonathan David Sarfati His lack of scientific training shows. How does one go from metallic hydrogen at *megabars* of pressure to an ice canopy in the extreme *vacuum* of space? Also, arguing about the magnetic properties of metallic hydrogen to statements about ice is like saying that because sodium is highly reactive and conductive, salt is also highly reactive and conductive.
Saturday at 5:39pm · Like..
Matt SIngleton I don't quote from kent hovind in this article. It is simply the fact that he came up with the theory as far as I know.
Did Kent Hovind go back in time to make the first century Jewish historian Josephus talk about an ice canopy?
The testimony of the ancients to a solid firmament is a powerful argument for new agers and an ice canopy would undo the attack especially in light of the smithsonian stories of titanaboa
Even if the ice wasn't pure water.
God could have made the canopy.
(just like the flood)
The crystal would be hydrogen and on top of the canopy would be H2O.
Saturday at 7:04pm via mobile · Like..
Matt SIngleton Hovind is not going to be teaching at any secular university. But Darwin had less scientific training and people are allowed to discuss his theory.
Saturday at 7:06pm via mobile · Like..
Matt SIngleton Dr. Sarfati, I knew you would disagree with my viewpoint. And I don't enjoy debate your opinion since I value it.
By my concern is for the truth. So I decided to post this and whatever disagreements you have, I want to hear so that I may become a better proponent for Christ
Saturday at 7:09pm via mobile · Like..
Jonathan David Sarfati The vacuum of space can't be equalled in the best laboratory vacuum pumps. Metallic hydrogen needs extremely high pressures, the opposite of a vacuum. Ice would also sublime readily, especially the side exposed to the sun. It seems that Josephus was influenced by the LXX translation of raqia as stereoma, influenced by the Greek cosmological ideas.
Yesterday at 1:45am · Like..
Linda Chartier Harris I'm not a scientist, but Dr. Sarfati's comment contains some good points here. But what about a vapor canopy? Do we think a lot of water might have enveloped the earth's atmosphere before the flood in vapor form, and that after the flood that extra layer of water was depleted?
Yesterday at 7:17am · Like..
Matt SIngleton The problem with the vapor and water canopy theories is that it would cause a great deal of air preassure, which would make it impossible to sustain life. Morris argued for water clouds to compensate the dilemma.
Yesterday at 7:23am via mobile · Like..
Matt SIngleton The ice canopy argues that the much more intense magnetic field suspended the ice in place alleviating the air pressure.
Yesterday at 7:25am via mobile · Like..
Matt SIngleton As far as Josephus, I am not going to say that is an impossible conclusion. But this was a Jew explaining Jewish tradition.
Yesterday at 7:27am via mobile · Like..
Matt SIngleton However, the titaniboa story is still very significant.
Naturalist have tried to postulate dinosaurs as warm blooded and I think this is where the whole bird evolution came into play.
But giant snakes and turtles and alligators are still snakes and turtles and alligators. They were cold blooded. And if they were cold blooded then the dinosaurs can be cold blooded like the other reptiles. Which implies that the earth was hotter.
Yesterday at 7:34am via mobile · Like..
Jonathan David Sarfati I don't see that Titanoboa is anywhere as much of a problem as Meganeura, but my flood article explains that. A problem with vapor canopies is that water is the most effective greenhouse gas by a long way.
There is not the slightest evidence that the earth's magnetic field could sustain an ice canopy, since the field is weak and ice is very weakly diamagnetic. And as I've said, an ice canopy would not last long exposed to sunlight and a vacuum. Metallic hydrogen is a red herring.
I also see no evidence that Josephus or Gill believed that the alleged crystalline firmament collapsed to provide flood water.
20 hours ago · Like..
Matt SIngleton Hovind's theory does not postulate that the ice canopy was the source for all the flood waters. He argues that it would have only been 4-6 inches of worldwide rain.
But there would have also been been some ice from the meteorite. Afterwords, then all that water would have been through tectonic shifting as your ministry and answers in Genesis proposed.
But the meteorite shattering to crystalline canopy would have been a mechanism to damage the magnetic field causing the tectonic catastrophe.
19 hours ago via mobile ·
Like..Matt SIngleton But there are other factors to consider.
The moon is slowly drifting away.
Thousands of years ago it would be closer with a greater magnetic pull.
Couldn't this have changed the situation?
A canopy could have protected the earth from tidal waves and the lunar gravity may have been able to sustain a canopy and stop it from collapsing in space.
19 hours ago via mobile ·
Like..Linda Chartier Harris At any rate, don't we think that most of the flood water came from a subterranean source? And that it would have shot out of the cracks in the crust with so much force it would also have seemed like rain when it fell back to the surface?
18 hours ago ·
Like..Jonathan David Sarfati Shattering of ice would not affect the earth's magnetic field. It is an electrical insulator and weakly diamagnetic. How would a canopy prevent tides? I don't know of any gravitational insulator. Also, as my article explains, the initiating cause of the Flood must be in the ocean, not the sky. This is consistent with what Linda says above.
17 hours ago ·
Like..Matt SIngleton Linda, yes we agree that most of the water would come from a subterranean source.
But there are other issues like the fact that our current world doesn't have the capacity to house a world filled with giant animals.
And more importantly
While the science debate is interesting.
The truth is rooted first in revelation, and only then can we evaluate the evidence.
Science is always changing because there always factors that we either for get or never knew in the first place.
I didn't become a young earth creationist and then decided to make a case for the bible to be young earth. I went the other way around.
Therefore if the biblical case is convincing then , I am sure that eventually evidence will be found supporting it.
Dr. Sarfati if you admit that pagan cultures were correct in sighting the fact of a worldwide flood and the existence of dragons, why would the sources not be able to be correct about a canopy?
16 hours ago via mobile ·
Like..Matt SIngleton I cited russel Humphrey's tying the magnetic reversals to the flood.
So if there was an ice canopy, it shattering would be connected at least in some way. But the meteorite, which impacted the gulf of mexico and shattered the canopy would in my
Mind have started the chain reaction leading to reversals and plate tectonic shifts.
16 hours ago via mobile · Like..Jonathan David Sarfati The pagan cultures never connected the breakup of a crystalling stereoma to the Flood, and thought it was still there. Yes, Humphreys tied field reversals to the Flood, but not with a hypothetical ice canopy that miraculously survived the vacuum of space for 1,656 years.
14 hours ago · Like..Matt SIngleton I am making a commutative case.
Neither Humphreys not he pagan's are to agree with my conclusions, only the points in which they are cited.
Surely you have used evolutionist evidence at some point to reenforce your opinion.
12 hours ago via mobile · Like..Jonathan David Sarfati But this crystalline canopy fails on so many scientific grounds, and there is no biblical support for such a thing being the cause of the flood. There are much better models.
11 hours ago · Like..Matt SIngleton The theory as it postulated does not claim that the canopy was the source of all or even most the water. But it is in the bible.
Look at job 37:18
11 hours ago via mobile · Like..Jonathan David Sarfati Job was after the Flood, so this alleged canopy must be there, not collapsed. It also doesn't affect the problems that the magnetic theory has.
11 hours ago · Like..Matt SIngleton God "spread out the sky" during creation. God is chastising Job as with the rest of the discourse showing Job that he is the Sovereign ruler of all creation and that it is ludicrous to question His judgement since man is limited in his understanding, while God is limitless.
4 hours ago via mobile · Like..Linda Chartier Harris Actually Matt, God is not the one speaking in Job 37. The speaker there is Elihu, as introduced in the discourse in Job 36:1, and continuing to Job 37:24. God picks up the discourse at Job 38:1.
4 hours ago · Like..Matt SIngleton Sorry for that error Linda. However we should remember that it was Elihu who had the only counsel which was never corrected. Elihu is speaking the truth as he confesses....36 Elihu also proceeded, and said,
2 Suffer me a little, and I will shew thee that I have yet to speak on God's behalf.
3 I will fetch my knowledge from afar, and will ascribe righteousness to my Maker.
4 For truly my words shall not be false: he that is perfect in knowledge is with thee.
14 minutes ago · Like..
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
16 comments:
Now Dr. Sarfati expresses a slight amount of scientism early on. Where it seems clear that his scientific understanding is ruling his scriptural interpretation.
Assuming that science can provide an absolute authority. This is rare for a theological conservative which I have no problem classifying Dr, Sarfati as.
However science based in the philosophy of empiricism does not provide man with such absolute certainty. because evidence changes everything and we are always gain ing new evidence and many times we forget other evidence. So as I feel I won the battle on scriptural interpretation. I feel the truth will follow me.
It is it impossible for there to be a canopy of earth hanging over the planet?
No, other planets have similar structures. for instance uranus
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_weather_like_on_Uranus#
Best Answer.The cloud tops are very cold, as low as -200 degrees Celsius. There is no true surface, only a gradual increase in pressure to a dense fluid of water and ammonia.
Uranus has very strong winds as well as clouds of ammonia and water. Storms seem to be rare. That is about all that is really known.
The absolute vaccuum of space is going to be countered by the gravity and weight of the canopy.
also the coldness of space will make it freeze.
a more thorough explanation is found in the Youtube video
"The crystalline Canopy Theory"
It should also be notticed that this was a part of God's miracle of creation. So we don't have to have a naturalistic explanation as to how it got there.
We understand God to be the ultimate physicist. So He could construct a canopy to his liking that would be scientifically sound.
MeganeuraFrom Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaJump to: navigation, search Meganeura
Temporal range: 305–299 Ma
PreЄЄOSDCPTJKPgNLate Carboniferous
Reconstruction
Cast of an original fossil of a Meganeuridae
Scientific classification
Kingdom: Animalia
Phylum: Arthropoda
Class: Insecta
Superorder: Odonatoptera
Order: Meganisoptera
Family: Meganeuridae
Genus: Meganeura
Species
Meganeura brongniarti
Meganeura monyi
Meganeura vischerae
Paleontology portal
Meganeura is a genus of extinct insects from the Carboniferous period approximately 300 million years ago, which resembled and are related to the present-day dragonflies. With wingspans of up to 65 cm (2.1 ft), M. monyi is one of the largest known flying insect species; the Permian Meganeuropsis permiana is another. Meganeura were predatory, and fed on other insects, and even small amphibians.
Fossils were discovered in the French Stephanian Coal Measures of Commentry in 1880. In 1885, French paleontologist Charles Brongniart described and named the fossil "Meganeura" (large-nerved), which refers to the network of veins on the insect's wings. Another fine fossil specimen was found in 1979 at Bolsover in Derbyshire. The holotype is housed in the Muséum national d'histoire naturelle, Paris
SizeControversy has prevailed as to how insects of the Carboniferous period were able to grow so large. The way oxygen is diffused through the insect's body via its tracheal breathing system puts an upper limit on body size, which prehistoric insects seem to have well exceeded. It was originally proposed (Harlé & Harlé, 1911) that Meganeura was only able to fly because the atmosphere at that time contained more oxygen than the present 20%. This theory was dismissed by fellow scientists, but has found approval more recently through further study into the relationship between gigantism and oxygen availability.[1] If this theory is correct, these insects would have been susceptible to falling oxygen levels and certainly could not survive in our modern atmosphere. Other research indicates that insects really do breathe, with "rapid cycles of tracheal compression and expansion".[2] Recent analysis of the flight energetics of modern insects and birds suggests that both the oxygen levels and air density provide a bound on size.[3]
A general problem with all oxygen-related explanations of the giant dragonflies is the circumstance that very large Meganeuridae with a wing span of 45 cm (1.5 ft) also occurred in the Upper Permian of Lodève in France, when the oxygen content of the atmosphere was already much lower than in the Carboniferous and Lower Permian.[4]
Bechly (2004) suggested that the lack of aerial vertebrate predators allowed pterygote insects to evolve to maximum sizes during the Carboniferous and Permian periods, maybe accelerated by an evolutionary "arms race" for increase in body size between plant-feeding Palaeodictyoptera and Meganisoptera as their predators.[5]
Now on the Youtube video they show how rocket fuel expelled from a spaceship leaving earths atmosphere son had hydrogen crstalizing.
Water in the vaccum of space could indeed split and hydrogen could crystalize and gain magnetic properties.
I am still analizing Dr. Sarfati's article.
However, I find one fact interesting. Concerning atmospheric preassure and oxygen.
"One idea for the pre-Flood world, derived partly from the fallacious pre-Flood paradise assumption, is that oxygen concentration15 or atmospheric pressure was higher than today. This would supposedly have beneficial effects duplicated in today’s hyperbaric chambers. These increase the oxygen partial pressure16 as per Dalton’s Law.17
Yet would they be as beneficial as claimed, given the known health benefits of anti-oxidants? To be fair, evolutionists have also proposed higher oxygen concentration or higher atmospheric pressure in the past, for some of the reasons below.18
This is supported by some scientific evidence, yet this does not hold up"
So this is not in reality a mythological creationist idea. This is a valid point.
Dr. Sarfati posted this link..
Jonathan David Sarfati http://creation.com/is-the-raqiya-firmament-a-solid-dome
Another issue is that while Dr. Sarfati will argue against the canopy by showing hat various group never thought the canOpy fell.
They never claimed that the plates shifted, making a 20 mile geyser either
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.
Now according to russel humphreys and other canopy denying creationist. the water from the earth was separated and spread to a canopy over the entire known universe! now we have yet to find the edge of the universe. is it at least fantstic if not ludicris to assume the earth had water that is covering the universe?
The atheistic evolutionary scientist may not admit it. But they really about do.
"It was the largest snake ever, and if its astounding size alone wasn’t enough to dazzle the most sunburned fossil hunter, the fact of its existence may have implications for understanding the history of life on earth and possibly even for anticipating the future."
Read more: http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/How-Titanoboa-the-40-Foot-Long-Snake-Was-Found.html#ixzz2iny0MxrN
Follow us: @SmithsonianMag on Twitter
Air From Dinosaurs' Age Suggests Dramatic Change
By JAMES GLEICK, Special to the New York Times
Published: October 29, 1987
Sign In to E-Mail
Print
Single-Page
Tiny bubbles trapped in amber for 80 million years have given scientists their first direct look at the earth's atmosphere in the time of the dinosaurs, a mix of gases that appears dramatically different from the air we breathe today.
A preliminary analysis suggests that the ancient atmosphere may have been 50 percent richer in the oxygen that sustains the animal life of the planet. That finding, to be presented here Thursday at the annual meeting of the Geological Society of America, is sure to astonish experts on global climate and the evolution of life. They had assumed that the air then differed little from today's.
Until now, the oldest known samples of air were far younger, the product of a 160,000-year-old core of polar ice that was painstakingly drawn over the last five years from its resting place a mile below the Antarctic surface. But by crushing bits of amber and analyzing the faint breath of gas that escapes, researchers appear to have opened an unexpected new window onto the history of the atmosphere and the creatures it nourished. Seeking Detailed Picture
As the technique is refined, the researchers, Robert A. Berner of Yale University and Gary P. Landis of the United States Geological Survey in Denver, hope through the study of other amber samples to assemble a detailed picture going back even farther. Microscopic air bubbles are not unusual in amber, the resin from pine trees that has hardened into yellowish translucent lumps. Some amber has been preserved for 200 million to 300 million years.
''It's very exciting,'' said James C. G. Walker of the University of Michigan, an authority on the development of the earth's atmosphere and oceans. ''I think it's a tremendously promising technique.''
The researchers emphasize that their analysis is still tentative, particularly the surprising discovery of excess oxygen. But they believe that they have ruled out every possible alternative and that the amber bubbles reflect the composition of ancient air, folded into resin that oozed from the coniferous trees of the Cretaceous era.
Oxygen now makes up 21 percent of the atmosphere; the rest is mainly nitrogen, with a fraction of a percent of carbon dioxide and traces of many other gases. The Cretaceous amber, found in northern Manitoba, suggests an oxygen content as high as 32 percent. The rest is mainly nitrogen, as in the atmosphere today. Changing Thought on Extinctions
If confirmed, the discovery of an oxygen-rich atmosphere in the planet's past would intrude on the debate over a wide range of problems, from the history of climate change to the rise and extinction of species.
''No one's ever thought about the possibility that oxygen could change so dramatically,'' Dr. Berner said. ''Some people won't be happy about that high a number.''
Extra oxygen would have been a great boon to animals trying to develop more efficient versions of the energy-generating chemistry of life. A given species might have been able to get by with smaller lungs, for example, and similar economies might have benefited organisms in many other ways.
A decline in oxygen content, on the other hand, would surely have affected species accustomed to a richer atmosphere. Some scientists speculated today that paleontologists studying the history of evolution may be tempted to look to the new research as a possible influence on the mass extinctions, including that of the dinosaur, that closed the Cretaceous era.
The primordial earth, before the origin of life, had an atmosphere with no oxygen at all. It took billions of years for early organisms to free the oxygen that was bound to iron oxide and other minerals in the planet's surface.
http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2003/18feb_nlc/
this article discusses ice clouds which they have found in antartica south america and austrailia
have you ever wondered about the fact that we have no problem with so many satellites over our earth?
https://www.facebook.com/somersault1824/photos/a.172490939524242.30064.170817006358302/631095953663736/?type=1&theater
Post a Comment