Behold!
God is my salvation Behold
jesus is my Rock!
For the LORD Jehovah is my strength and my song
Jesus gave me love and the strength to carry on!
He also has become my salvation
Behold!
God is my salvation Behold
jesus is my Rock!
Therefore with joy shall ye draw waters out
of the wells of salvation till the old man falls out
Behold!
God is my salvation Behold
jesus is my Rock!
call upon his name
there's no one left to blame
when you behold
when you behold
when you behold
when you behold
Thursday, November 8, 2012
On facebook debating the canopy theory
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..
.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..
Friday, November 2, 2012
Let's put the canopy back up: a defense of the canopy theory
In recent times the idea of a canopy over the earth in ancient times has been dismissed even by scientist who accept the genesis account of creation. I was educated under a progressive old earth model and was uncomfortable with reconciling this view with scripture. Not much later, I discovered the ministry of answers in Genesis and became a pupil of their writings. I would then study the writings of Henry Morris Who held to a canopy theory and became more symopothetic. Since then I have come back to this issue. Scientifically a vapor canopy has become a bit of a physics problem and most creationist left it there. Especially since plate tectonics experts like John Baumgardner have provided succesful flood geology models. Then I started studying the teachings of Kent Hovind. His "Hovind Theory" has impressed me and so I have done my own research as to the plausibility of this. Although I am not sure if I would argue a pre-flood ice age. Only that there were huge ice meteor deposits prior to the Great Flood and probably still a post flood ice age.
What does the scripture say?
(note that I used John Gill the Geneva Bible since these men lived prior to the evolutionary theory.)
Gen 1:6 And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters. 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. 8 And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day. 9 And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so.
"f) As the sea and rivers, from those waters that are in the clouds, which are upheld by Gods power, least they should overwhelm the world." "(g) That is, the region of the air, and all that is above us."1560 Geneva Bible: notes
John Gill's Exposition of the Bible Genesis 1:6 "Genesis 1:6And God said, let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters On which the Spirit of God was sitting and moving, ( Genesis 1:2 ) part of which were formed into clouds, and drawn up into heaven by the force of the body of fire and light already produced; and the other part left on the earth, not yet gathered into one place, as afterwards: between these God ordered a "firmament to be", or an "expanse" F22; something stretched out and spread like a curtain, tent, or canopy: and to this all those passages of Scripture refer, which speak of the stretching out of the heavens, as this firmament or expanse is afterwards called; see ( Psalms 104:2 ) ( Isaiah 40:22 ) ( 42:5 ) and by it is meant the air, as it is rendered by the Targum on ( Psalms 19:1 ) we call it the "firmament" from the F23 word which the Greek interpreter uses, because it is firm, lasting, and durable: and it has the name of an expanse from its wide extent, it reaching from the earth to the third heaven; the lower and thicker parts of it form the atmosphere in which we breathe; the higher and thinner parts of it, the air in which fowls fly, and the ether or sky in which the sun, moon, and stars are placed; for all these are said to be in the firmament or expanse, ( Genesis 1:17 Genesis 1:20 ) . These are the stories in the heavens the Scriptures speak of, ( Amos 9:6 ) and the air is divided by philosophers into higher, middle, and lower regions: and so the Targum of Jonathan places this firmament or expanse between the extremities of the heaven, and the waters of the ocean. The word in the Syriac language has the sense of binding and compressing F24; and so it is used in the Syriac version of ( Luke 6:38 ) and may denote the power of the air when formed in compressing the chaos, and dividing and separating the parts of it; and which it now has in compressing the earth, and the several parts that are in it, and by its compression preserves them and retains them in their proper places F25 and let it divide the waters from the waters; the waters under it from those above it, as it is explained in the next verse; of which more there. Genesis 1:8 And God called the firmament heaven Including the starry and airy heavens: it has its name from its height in the Arabic language, it being above the earth, and reaching to the third heaven; though others take the word "shamaim" to be a compound of two words, "sham" and "maim", that is, there are waters, namely, in the clouds of heaven:"
Now naturally Gill wants to assume that creation would be identical with his current reality so we see his references seemingly solid in natural while he attempts to explain this as clouds. This was my original understanding as well.
Genesis 6:17 And, behold, I, even I, do bring a flood of waters upon the earth, to destroy all flesh, wherein is the breath of life, from under heaven; and every thing that is in the earth shall die.
Nottice that the waters are coming upon the earth as in coming down.
Genesis 7:4 For yet seven days, and I will cause it to rain upon the earth forty days and forty nights; and every living substance that I have made will I destroy from off the face of the earth.
Let's remember that the rain came down 40 days and nights. Not that they kept raining the whole time the earth was flooded.
Genesis 7:6 And Noah was six hundred years old when the flood of waters was upon the earth.
Genesis 7:10 And it came to pass after seven days, that the waters of the flood were upon the earth.
One could argue that the rain was most intense in the 7 days.
Genesis 7:21 And all flesh died that moved upon the earth, both of fowl, and of cattle, and of beast, and of every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth, and every man:
Nottice how all flesh died "that moved upon the earth" sea life and plant life is uncertain.
Genesis 8:2 The fountains also of the deep and the windows of heaven were stopped, and the rain from heaven was restrained;
A crystaline canopy is perfectly illustrated as a window.
Genesis 8:11 And the dove came in to him in the evening; and, lo, in her mouth was an olive leaf pluckt off: so Noah knew that the waters were abated from off the earth.
Note the waters did not return to the air. Which is why there is so much of the continental plates that are currently under water.
8:21 And the Lord smelled a sweet savour; and the Lord said in his heart, I will not again curse the ground any more for man's sake; for the imagination of man's heart is evil from his youth; neither will I again smite any more every thing living, as I have done. 22 While the earth remaineth, seedtime and harvest, and cold and heat, and summer and winter, and day and night shall not cease. "(l) The order of nature destroyed by the flood, is restored by Gods promise."1560 Geneva Bible: notes Job 38:8 Or who shut up the sea with doors, when it brake forth, as if it had issued out of the womb? 9 When I made the cloud the garment thereof, and thick darkness a swaddlingband for it, "(g) As though the great sea was but as a little baby in the hands of God to turn to and fro." 1560 Geneva Bible: notes 10 And brake up for it my decreed place, and set bars and doors,
22 Hast thou entered into the treasures of the snow? or hast thou seen the treasures of the hail, 23 Which I have reserved against the time of trouble, against the day of battle and war? 2Peter 3:5 For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water: 6 Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished: (4) He sets against them the creation of heaven and earth by the word of God, which these men are willingly ignorant of. (b) Which appeared, when the waters were gathered together into one place. (5) Secondly he sets against them the universal flood, which was the destruction of the whole world. (c) For the waters returning into their former place, this world, that is to say, this beauty of the earth which we see, and all living creatures which live upon the earth, perished. 1560 Geneva Bible: notes Is it plausible?
Job 37:18 Hast thou with him spread out the sky, which is strong, and as a molten looking glass?
Historical Record and Interpretation
What is unique about this statement is that Josephus was not a bible commentator. Nor was he a 20thcentury fundamentalist creation scientist. Josephus is a first century Jew writing the history of the Jews! He wrote this as a historical document with no knowledge of the creation evolution debate. The early creationist were imagining a canopy of liquid water or vapor. Only recently have a small minority of the small minority of creation scientist entertained this idea. But he is not the only one...
"For the Spirit being one, and holding the place of light,(2) was between the water and the heaven, in order that the darkness might not in any way communicate with the heaven, which was nearer God, before God said, 'Let there be light.' The heaven, therefore, being like a dome-shaped covering, comprehended matter which was like a clod." Theophilus to Autolycus(or antioch) Book 2, Chapter 13 (theophilus was a 2nd century christian)
"The learned of Israel say, "The sphere stands firm, and the planets revolve"; the learned of the nations say, "The sphere moves, and the planets stand firm." The learned of Israel say, "The sun moves by day beneath the firmament, and by night above the firmament"; the learned of the nations say, "The sun moves by day beneath the firmament, and by night beneath the earth."Pesahim 94b from the Talmud
Is this so scientifically impossible? First of all science and empiricism is limited and flawed. there are challenges to the model. But there is scientific evidence which can back this model up.
The canopy could be upheld by the increased magnetic field
a. reversals in the earths magnetic field can be traced to the flood
"A Creationist Theory for Reversals and Fluctuations
The validity of the data required a new theory to explain them. In 1986 I suggested that strong flows of the fluid in the earth's core could produce rapid reversals of the field during and after the Genesis flood.[9] The resulting disturbances in the core would cause the field intensity at the earth's surface to fluctuate up and down for thousands of years afterwards.
This "dynamic-decay" theory is a more general version of the free-decay theory, since it takes account of motions in the core fluid. Dynamic decay explains the main features of the data, especially several features evolutionists find puzzling. In 1988, startling new evidence was found for the most essential prediction of my theory--very rapid reversals;[10] and in 1990, I showed a specific physical mechanism for such reversals.[11]"
Dr. Russel Humphrey's the Earths magnetic field is young
b. the magnetic field would bring a protective environment
"The sun is having hot flashes again. NASA reported that on June 7 a "dramatic solar flare" was flung out into space.1 Such flares release particles that can collide with earth's atmosphere and cause the phenomenon known as "northern lights." What protects life on earth from this very harmful stream of radiation?
A flare sometimes results when superheated material in the sun gets twisted up by rotating physical and magnetic forces. And if solar activity is particularly violent, the flare can get pinched off and thrown outward in a "coronal mass ejection," or CME.2 Photons, electrons and protons are ejected into space, often in the direction of earth.
NASA released clear images of the massive solar flare, and EarthSky reported, "The CME should deliver a glancing blow to Earth's magnetic field during the late hours of June 8 or June 9, 2011. High-latitude sky watchers should be alert for auroras—the beautiful northern lights—when the CME arrives."1 The lights are produced when solar material encounters earth's magnetic field.
Some of the radiation released by solar flares is at the X-ray end of the electromagnetic spectrum, which is not healthy. But the magnetic field protects life on earth from this serious danger. If the field were not there, living creatures could not survive."Northern Lights Display Earth's Designed Protection
by Brian Thomas, M.S. *
So if the magnetic field currently provides protection and it was much more intense in the past. We could imagine an environment free from the harmful effects of radiation.
c. hydrogen(the main component of water can be frozen and have metallic quallities.
"This is the hydrogen scientists know best--the forms they have measured, modeled, and analyzed for decades. But there are other manifestations of hydrogen that, until recently, have eluded investigation. Place this simple element in extremes of temperature and pressure, and it will display a range of personalities that are surprising and profound.
One of these other personalities, which is being investigated by NCSA physicist and Alliance Executive Committee member David Ceperley, is metallic hydrogen. Squeeze hydrogen at pressures 2 to 10 million times greater than normally found on Earth and this colorless, odorless, tasteless gas transforms into a metal. Conditions like this exist inside Jovian planets like Jupiter, where cold clouds of hydrogen gas turn to liquid metallic hydrogen under the pressure exerted by this gaseous giant. Extremes of temperature and pressure can exist on Earth--when hydrogen is ignited within some rocket engines, or during thermonuculear fusion.
Researchers have known about the metallic state of hydrogen for more than 60 years--ever since quantum mechanics predicted the rules governing electrons. But they lacked the ability to make quantitative predictions of this state--the kind of knowledge that sheds light on the distribution of mass in Jovian-like objects and may lead to more efficient ways to achieve thermonuclear fusion. It is knowledge that determines hydrogen's equation of state, which Ceperley believes he is now "tantalizingly close" to providing."
The National Center for Super Computing Applications (NCSA)
The would set the stage for an ice canopy upheld by electro magnetic energy.
Cold blooded dinosaurs would need an earth that had more heat in the environment.
Titanaboa
"The size of the snake immediately raised questions about how it got to be that big, and what it needed to survive. The Cerrejón team concluded in 2009 that Titanoboa had to have lived in a climate with a mean ambient temperature between 86 and 93 degrees Fahrenheit, substantially higher than the hottest average for today’s tropical forests, which is 82 degrees."
"Titanoboa was a coldblooded animal whose body temperature depended on that of its habitat. Reptiles can grow bigger in warmer climates, where they can absorb enough energy to maintain a necessary metabolic rate. That’s why insects, reptiles and amphibians tend to be larger in the tropics than in the temperate zone. In this view, extraordinary heat is what made the snake a titan. The same principle would explain why ancient turtles and lungfish of Cerrejón were, like Titanoboa, much larger than their modern relatives.
The relationship between coldblooded body mass and ambient temperature was the subject of a 2005 study by researchers at the Nuclear Physics Institute in St. Petersburg, Russia. By examining species sizes at a variety of different ambient temperatures, Anastassia Makarieva and colleagues calculated how fossils could be used to estimate temperatures in the distant past."
Read more: http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/How-Titanoboa-the-40-Foot-Long-Snake-Was-Found.html#ixzz2B52GpyOm Read more: http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/How-Titanoboa-the-40-Foot-Long-Snake-Was-Found.html#ixzz2B4zC2L4G
For a while, it has been argued that dinosaurs being reptiles are cold-blooded and that cold blooded giant animals would need a much warmer climate in order to survive. Evolutionist/uniformitarians then started to fight this by stating that Dinosaurs may have been warm blooded or that there size would better preserve heat etc. Since we do not have any live dinosaurs in captivity we can only guess. But here we have Giant fossils of a Boa as well in the same site giant fossils of turtles and crocodiles. Since we have turtles and crocodiles today, we know that they are cold blooded. So we have environments of cold blooded animals, alongside dinosaurs (which are likely cold blooded as well) which demand that the earth be of a warmer climate in the past.
The crystalline canopy would provide such warmth.
Secular scientists have believed a prehistoric asteroid hit the for sometime.
Asteroid Killed Off the Dinosaurs, Says International Scientific Panel
ScienceDaily (Mar. 4, 2010) — The Cretaceous-Tertiary mass extinction, which wiped out the dinosaurs and more than half of species on Earth, was caused by an asteroid colliding with Earth and not massive volcanic activity, according to a comprehensive review of all the available evidence, published in the journal Science.
A panel of 41 international experts, including UK researchers from Imperial College London, the University of Cambridge, University College London and the Open University, reviewed 20 years' worth of research to determine the cause of the Cretaceous-Tertiary (KT) extinction, which happened around 65 million years ago. The extinction wiped out more than half of all species on the planet, including the dinosaurs, bird-like pterosaurs and large marine reptiles, clearing the way for mammals to become the dominant species on Earth. The new review of the evidence shows that the extinction was caused by a massive asteroid slamming into Earth at Chicxulub (pronounced chick-shoo-loob) in Mexico. The asteroid, which was around 15 kilometres wide, is believed to have hit Earth with a force one billion times more powerful than the atomic bomb at Hiroshima. It would have blasted material at high velocity into the atmosphere, triggering a chain of events that caused a global winter, wiping out much of life on Earth in a matter of days.
Scientists have previously argued about whether the extinction was caused by the asteroid or by volcanic activity in the Deccan Traps in India, where there were a series of super volcanic eruptions that lasted approximately 1.5 million years. These eruptions spewed 1,100,000 km3 of basalt lava across the Deccan Traps, which would have been enough to fill the Black Sea twice, and were thought to have caused a cooling of the atmosphere and acid rain on a global scale.
In the new study, scientists analysed the work of palaeontologists, geochemists, climate modellers, geophysicists and sedimentologists who have been collecting evidence about the KT extinction over the last 20 years. Geological records show that the event that triggered the extinction destroyed marine and land ecosystems rapidly, according to the researchers, who conclude that the Chicxulub asteroid impact is the only plausible explanation for this.
Despite evidence for relatively active volcanism in Deccan Traps at the time, marine and land ecosystems showed only minor changes within the 500,000 years before the time of the KT extinction. Furthermore, computer models and observational data suggest that the release of gases such as sulphur into the atmosphere after each volcanic eruption in the Deccan Traps would have had a short lived effect on the planet. These would not cause enough damage to create a rapid mass extinction of land and marine species.
Dr Joanna Morgan, co-author of the review from the Department of Earth Science and Engineering at Imperial College London, said: "We now have great confidence that an asteroid was the cause of the KT extinction. This triggered large-scale fires, earthquakes measuring more than 10 on the Richter scale, and continental landslides, which created tsunamis. However, the final nail in the coffin for the dinosaurs happened when blasted material was ejected at high velocity into the atmosphere. This shrouded the planet in darkness and caused a global winter, killing off many species that couldn't adapt to this hellish environment."
Dr Gareth Collins, Natural Environment Research Council Fellow and another co-author from the Department of Earth Science and Engineering at Imperial College London, added: "The asteroid was about the size of the Isle of Wight and hit Earth 20 times faster than a speeding bullet. The explosion of hot rock and gas would have looked like a huge ball of fire on the horizon, grilling any living creature in the immediate vicinity that couldn't find shelter. Ironically, while this hellish day signalled the end of the 160 million year reign of the dinosaurs, it turned out to be a great day for mammals, who had lived in the shadow of the dinosaurs prior to this event. The KT extinction was a pivotal moment in Earth's history, which ultimately paved the way for humans to become the dominant species on Earth."
In the review, the panel sifted through past studies to analyse the evidence that linked the asteroid impact and volcanic activity with the KT extinction. One key piece of evidence was the abundance of iridium in geological samples around the world from the time of the extinction. Iridium is very rare in Earth's crust and very common in asteroids. Immediately after the iridium layer, there is a dramatic decline in fossil abundance and species, indicating that the KT extinction followed very soon after the asteroid hit.
Another direct link between the asteroid impact and the extinction is evidence of 'shocked' quartz in geological records. Quartz is shocked when hit very quickly by a massive force and these minerals are only found at nuclear explosion sites and at meteorite impacts sites. The team say that an abundance of shocked quartz in rock layers all around the world at the KT boundary lends further weight to their conclusions that a massive meteorite impact happened at the time of the mass extinction.
The panel was able to discount previous studies that suggested that the Chicxulub impact occurred 300,000 years prior to the KT extinction. The researchers say that these studies had misinterpreted geological data that was gathered close to the Chicxulub impact site. This is because the rocks close to the impact zone underwent complex geological processes after the initial asteroid collision, which made it difficult to interpret the data correctly.
Things explained in the canopy theory large sized animals legions of frozen mammoths
"Such confounding enigmas, not only about the mammoth and the mammoth steppe fauna, but also about the ice age itself, have naturally produced many hypotheses. Early scientists produced a lot of confused writing. For example, Sir Henry Howorth,7,12 who gathered copious observations from Siberian explorers that are considered fairly accurate, believed the mammoths met their demise in a continental-scale flood, but that this flood was not Noah’s Flood"
"The existence of carcasses with identifiable stomach remains and well-preserved bones and tusks has suggested a ‘quick-freeze’ to many. This has been reinforced by the research of the Birds Eye Frozen Foods Company, which calculated a sudden fall to below -100°C based on heat conduction.103" Michael Ooard The extinction of the woolly mammoth: was it a quick freeze?
Michael Oard actually opposes the quick freeze theory due to the fact that many carcasses have decayed besides the frozen ones. However in the Hovind theory, the iceage would have taken place prior to the flood. due to impact from frozen asteroids upon the ice canopy. The waters of the flood would have eroded many of the carcases before refreezing which would allow for the not as frozen carcases.
"Could the animals have lived in Siberia today during the relatively warm summer, perhaps migrating there from the south? The temperature likely would have been pleasant for them, but the environment deadly. Siberia today is in the permafrost zone where up to a metre of the surface melts in the summer. Water pools on the surface forming massive bogs and muskegs, making summer travel difficult, if not impossible, for man and beast.44,45 Tolmachoff 46 states that a few inches of this sticky mud makes the substrate practically impassable for a man, and that a foot or more would probably trap a mammoth.
Siberia may be lush with vegetation in the summer, but it is the wrong type. Although there are patches of grass, bog and muskeg vegetation predominates, and these are low in nutrition for grazers.47 The taiga forest vegetation south of the current tundra is also poorly digestible for grazers.48 Comparing living elephants to mammoths, the daily requirement for a woolly mammoth would have been about 200 to 300 kg of succulent vegetation49 and 130–190 litres of water! Vereshchagin50 flatly declares: ‘Neither mammoth nor bison could exist in the sort of tundra that exists there [in Siberia] today.’"
So if Siberia were a warmer climate, then perhaps the ice was added to the environement when a group of frozen meteorites hit the earth shattering the ice canopy.
So if there was a crystaline canopy, a meteor shattered it. The stellar ice particles would have been pulled by the powerful magnetic field to the north and south poles. The impact would have started the earth to wabble as it rotated, thus causing seasons. The lack of metalic frozen hydrogen would have distorted the earths magnetic field triggoring the break down of the earth's tectonic plates. This would have caused the continental plates to sink and the flood to cover the earth. the New environment would have made things rough for man and animals. men would not live so long. The large animals would get smaller etc. etc
How do we understand the debate of canopy verses non-canopy creation scientist?
It is my viewpoint that a canopy understanding of creation is a more biblical interpretation. Also that a crystaline Canopy theory (as I have seen from Kent Hovind) is the best current creation science model.
While I hold that the canopy theory is more biblical. I do not find non-canopy young earth creationist to be false teachers, nor unbiblical. It is a detail in the genesis account that does not have any strong doctrinal consequences.
In terms of science, this is indeed a proof that creation science is indeed a science. because science experiments and test theories and hypothesis. We have now several flood geology models. (water clouds, water vapor, crystalline, plate tectonics, and arabic local flood) this shows that science is enchance by biblical christianity and not hindered.
What does the scripture say?
(note that I used John Gill the Geneva Bible since these men lived prior to the evolutionary theory.)
Gen 1:6 And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters. 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. 8 And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day. 9 And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so.
"f) As the sea and rivers, from those waters that are in the clouds, which are upheld by Gods power, least they should overwhelm the world." "(g) That is, the region of the air, and all that is above us."1560 Geneva Bible: notes
John Gill's Exposition of the Bible Genesis 1:6 "Genesis 1:6And God said, let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters On which the Spirit of God was sitting and moving, ( Genesis 1:2 ) part of which were formed into clouds, and drawn up into heaven by the force of the body of fire and light already produced; and the other part left on the earth, not yet gathered into one place, as afterwards: between these God ordered a "firmament to be", or an "expanse" F22; something stretched out and spread like a curtain, tent, or canopy: and to this all those passages of Scripture refer, which speak of the stretching out of the heavens, as this firmament or expanse is afterwards called; see ( Psalms 104:2 ) ( Isaiah 40:22 ) ( 42:5 ) and by it is meant the air, as it is rendered by the Targum on ( Psalms 19:1 ) we call it the "firmament" from the F23 word which the Greek interpreter uses, because it is firm, lasting, and durable: and it has the name of an expanse from its wide extent, it reaching from the earth to the third heaven; the lower and thicker parts of it form the atmosphere in which we breathe; the higher and thinner parts of it, the air in which fowls fly, and the ether or sky in which the sun, moon, and stars are placed; for all these are said to be in the firmament or expanse, ( Genesis 1:17 Genesis 1:20 ) . These are the stories in the heavens the Scriptures speak of, ( Amos 9:6 ) and the air is divided by philosophers into higher, middle, and lower regions: and so the Targum of Jonathan places this firmament or expanse between the extremities of the heaven, and the waters of the ocean. The word in the Syriac language has the sense of binding and compressing F24; and so it is used in the Syriac version of ( Luke 6:38 ) and may denote the power of the air when formed in compressing the chaos, and dividing and separating the parts of it; and which it now has in compressing the earth, and the several parts that are in it, and by its compression preserves them and retains them in their proper places F25 and let it divide the waters from the waters; the waters under it from those above it, as it is explained in the next verse; of which more there. Genesis 1:8 And God called the firmament heaven Including the starry and airy heavens: it has its name from its height in the Arabic language, it being above the earth, and reaching to the third heaven; though others take the word "shamaim" to be a compound of two words, "sham" and "maim", that is, there are waters, namely, in the clouds of heaven:"
Now naturally Gill wants to assume that creation would be identical with his current reality so we see his references seemingly solid in natural while he attempts to explain this as clouds. This was my original understanding as well.
Genesis 6:17 And, behold, I, even I, do bring a flood of waters upon the earth, to destroy all flesh, wherein is the breath of life, from under heaven; and every thing that is in the earth shall die.
Nottice that the waters are coming upon the earth as in coming down.
Genesis 7:4 For yet seven days, and I will cause it to rain upon the earth forty days and forty nights; and every living substance that I have made will I destroy from off the face of the earth.
Let's remember that the rain came down 40 days and nights. Not that they kept raining the whole time the earth was flooded.
Genesis 7:6 And Noah was six hundred years old when the flood of waters was upon the earth.
Genesis 7:10 And it came to pass after seven days, that the waters of the flood were upon the earth.
One could argue that the rain was most intense in the 7 days.
Genesis 7:21 And all flesh died that moved upon the earth, both of fowl, and of cattle, and of beast, and of every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth, and every man:
Nottice how all flesh died "that moved upon the earth" sea life and plant life is uncertain.
Genesis 8:2 The fountains also of the deep and the windows of heaven were stopped, and the rain from heaven was restrained;
A crystaline canopy is perfectly illustrated as a window.
Genesis 8:11 And the dove came in to him in the evening; and, lo, in her mouth was an olive leaf pluckt off: so Noah knew that the waters were abated from off the earth.
Note the waters did not return to the air. Which is why there is so much of the continental plates that are currently under water.
8:21 And the Lord smelled a sweet savour; and the Lord said in his heart, I will not again curse the ground any more for man's sake; for the imagination of man's heart is evil from his youth; neither will I again smite any more every thing living, as I have done. 22 While the earth remaineth, seedtime and harvest, and cold and heat, and summer and winter, and day and night shall not cease. "(l) The order of nature destroyed by the flood, is restored by Gods promise."1560 Geneva Bible: notes Job 38:8 Or who shut up the sea with doors, when it brake forth, as if it had issued out of the womb? 9 When I made the cloud the garment thereof, and thick darkness a swaddlingband for it, "(g) As though the great sea was but as a little baby in the hands of God to turn to and fro." 1560 Geneva Bible: notes 10 And brake up for it my decreed place, and set bars and doors,
22 Hast thou entered into the treasures of the snow? or hast thou seen the treasures of the hail, 23 Which I have reserved against the time of trouble, against the day of battle and war? 2Peter 3:5 For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water: 6 Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished: (4) He sets against them the creation of heaven and earth by the word of God, which these men are willingly ignorant of. (b) Which appeared, when the waters were gathered together into one place. (5) Secondly he sets against them the universal flood, which was the destruction of the whole world. (c) For the waters returning into their former place, this world, that is to say, this beauty of the earth which we see, and all living creatures which live upon the earth, perished. 1560 Geneva Bible: notes Is it plausible?
Job 37:18 Hast thou with him spread out the sky, which is strong, and as a molten looking glass?
18 Thou hast made an expanse with Him For the clouds -- strong as a hard mirror!" youngs literal translation.
It is obvious that there is a canopy implied here.
Historical Record and Interpretation
| "After this, on the second day, He placed the heaven over the whole world, and separated it from the other parts; and determined that it should stand by itself. He also placed a crystalline firmament around it." (Josephus book 1, chapter 1. Written by Paul L. Maier) |
What is unique about this statement is that Josephus was not a bible commentator. Nor was he a 20thcentury fundamentalist creation scientist. Josephus is a first century Jew writing the history of the Jews! He wrote this as a historical document with no knowledge of the creation evolution debate. The early creationist were imagining a canopy of liquid water or vapor. Only recently have a small minority of the small minority of creation scientist entertained this idea. But he is not the only one...
"For the Spirit being one, and holding the place of light,(2) was between the water and the heaven, in order that the darkness might not in any way communicate with the heaven, which was nearer God, before God said, 'Let there be light.' The heaven, therefore, being like a dome-shaped covering, comprehended matter which was like a clod." Theophilus to Autolycus(or antioch) Book 2, Chapter 13 (theophilus was a 2nd century christian)
"The learned of Israel say, "The sphere stands firm, and the planets revolve"; the learned of the nations say, "The sphere moves, and the planets stand firm." The learned of Israel say, "The sun moves by day beneath the firmament, and by night above the firmament"; the learned of the nations say, "The sun moves by day beneath the firmament, and by night beneath the earth."Pesahim 94b from the Talmud
Is this so scientifically impossible? First of all science and empiricism is limited and flawed. there are challenges to the model. But there is scientific evidence which can back this model up.
The canopy could be upheld by the increased magnetic field
a. reversals in the earths magnetic field can be traced to the flood
"A Creationist Theory for Reversals and Fluctuations
The validity of the data required a new theory to explain them. In 1986 I suggested that strong flows of the fluid in the earth's core could produce rapid reversals of the field during and after the Genesis flood.[9] The resulting disturbances in the core would cause the field intensity at the earth's surface to fluctuate up and down for thousands of years afterwards.
This "dynamic-decay" theory is a more general version of the free-decay theory, since it takes account of motions in the core fluid. Dynamic decay explains the main features of the data, especially several features evolutionists find puzzling. In 1988, startling new evidence was found for the most essential prediction of my theory--very rapid reversals;[10] and in 1990, I showed a specific physical mechanism for such reversals.[11]"
Dr. Russel Humphrey's the Earths magnetic field is young
b. the magnetic field would bring a protective environment
"The sun is having hot flashes again. NASA reported that on June 7 a "dramatic solar flare" was flung out into space.1 Such flares release particles that can collide with earth's atmosphere and cause the phenomenon known as "northern lights." What protects life on earth from this very harmful stream of radiation?
A flare sometimes results when superheated material in the sun gets twisted up by rotating physical and magnetic forces. And if solar activity is particularly violent, the flare can get pinched off and thrown outward in a "coronal mass ejection," or CME.2 Photons, electrons and protons are ejected into space, often in the direction of earth.
NASA released clear images of the massive solar flare, and EarthSky reported, "The CME should deliver a glancing blow to Earth's magnetic field during the late hours of June 8 or June 9, 2011. High-latitude sky watchers should be alert for auroras—the beautiful northern lights—when the CME arrives."1 The lights are produced when solar material encounters earth's magnetic field.
Some of the radiation released by solar flares is at the X-ray end of the electromagnetic spectrum, which is not healthy. But the magnetic field protects life on earth from this serious danger. If the field were not there, living creatures could not survive."Northern Lights Display Earth's Designed Protection
by Brian Thomas, M.S. *
So if the magnetic field currently provides protection and it was much more intense in the past. We could imagine an environment free from the harmful effects of radiation.
c. hydrogen(the main component of water can be frozen and have metallic quallities.
"This is the hydrogen scientists know best--the forms they have measured, modeled, and analyzed for decades. But there are other manifestations of hydrogen that, until recently, have eluded investigation. Place this simple element in extremes of temperature and pressure, and it will display a range of personalities that are surprising and profound.
One of these other personalities, which is being investigated by NCSA physicist and Alliance Executive Committee member David Ceperley, is metallic hydrogen. Squeeze hydrogen at pressures 2 to 10 million times greater than normally found on Earth and this colorless, odorless, tasteless gas transforms into a metal. Conditions like this exist inside Jovian planets like Jupiter, where cold clouds of hydrogen gas turn to liquid metallic hydrogen under the pressure exerted by this gaseous giant. Extremes of temperature and pressure can exist on Earth--when hydrogen is ignited within some rocket engines, or during thermonuculear fusion.
Researchers have known about the metallic state of hydrogen for more than 60 years--ever since quantum mechanics predicted the rules governing electrons. But they lacked the ability to make quantitative predictions of this state--the kind of knowledge that sheds light on the distribution of mass in Jovian-like objects and may lead to more efficient ways to achieve thermonuclear fusion. It is knowledge that determines hydrogen's equation of state, which Ceperley believes he is now "tantalizingly close" to providing."
The National Center for Super Computing Applications (NCSA)
The would set the stage for an ice canopy upheld by electro magnetic energy.
Cold blooded dinosaurs would need an earth that had more heat in the environment.
Titanaboa
"The size of the snake immediately raised questions about how it got to be that big, and what it needed to survive. The Cerrejón team concluded in 2009 that Titanoboa had to have lived in a climate with a mean ambient temperature between 86 and 93 degrees Fahrenheit, substantially higher than the hottest average for today’s tropical forests, which is 82 degrees."
"Titanoboa was a coldblooded animal whose body temperature depended on that of its habitat. Reptiles can grow bigger in warmer climates, where they can absorb enough energy to maintain a necessary metabolic rate. That’s why insects, reptiles and amphibians tend to be larger in the tropics than in the temperate zone. In this view, extraordinary heat is what made the snake a titan. The same principle would explain why ancient turtles and lungfish of Cerrejón were, like Titanoboa, much larger than their modern relatives.
The relationship between coldblooded body mass and ambient temperature was the subject of a 2005 study by researchers at the Nuclear Physics Institute in St. Petersburg, Russia. By examining species sizes at a variety of different ambient temperatures, Anastassia Makarieva and colleagues calculated how fossils could be used to estimate temperatures in the distant past."
Read more: http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/How-Titanoboa-the-40-Foot-Long-Snake-Was-Found.html#ixzz2B52GpyOm Read more: http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/How-Titanoboa-the-40-Foot-Long-Snake-Was-Found.html#ixzz2B4zC2L4G
For a while, it has been argued that dinosaurs being reptiles are cold-blooded and that cold blooded giant animals would need a much warmer climate in order to survive. Evolutionist/uniformitarians then started to fight this by stating that Dinosaurs may have been warm blooded or that there size would better preserve heat etc. Since we do not have any live dinosaurs in captivity we can only guess. But here we have Giant fossils of a Boa as well in the same site giant fossils of turtles and crocodiles. Since we have turtles and crocodiles today, we know that they are cold blooded. So we have environments of cold blooded animals, alongside dinosaurs (which are likely cold blooded as well) which demand that the earth be of a warmer climate in the past.
The crystalline canopy would provide such warmth.
Secular scientists have believed a prehistoric asteroid hit the for sometime.
Asteroid Killed Off the Dinosaurs, Says International Scientific Panel
ScienceDaily (Mar. 4, 2010) — The Cretaceous-Tertiary mass extinction, which wiped out the dinosaurs and more than half of species on Earth, was caused by an asteroid colliding with Earth and not massive volcanic activity, according to a comprehensive review of all the available evidence, published in the journal Science.
A panel of 41 international experts, including UK researchers from Imperial College London, the University of Cambridge, University College London and the Open University, reviewed 20 years' worth of research to determine the cause of the Cretaceous-Tertiary (KT) extinction, which happened around 65 million years ago. The extinction wiped out more than half of all species on the planet, including the dinosaurs, bird-like pterosaurs and large marine reptiles, clearing the way for mammals to become the dominant species on Earth. The new review of the evidence shows that the extinction was caused by a massive asteroid slamming into Earth at Chicxulub (pronounced chick-shoo-loob) in Mexico. The asteroid, which was around 15 kilometres wide, is believed to have hit Earth with a force one billion times more powerful than the atomic bomb at Hiroshima. It would have blasted material at high velocity into the atmosphere, triggering a chain of events that caused a global winter, wiping out much of life on Earth in a matter of days.
Scientists have previously argued about whether the extinction was caused by the asteroid or by volcanic activity in the Deccan Traps in India, where there were a series of super volcanic eruptions that lasted approximately 1.5 million years. These eruptions spewed 1,100,000 km3 of basalt lava across the Deccan Traps, which would have been enough to fill the Black Sea twice, and were thought to have caused a cooling of the atmosphere and acid rain on a global scale.
In the new study, scientists analysed the work of palaeontologists, geochemists, climate modellers, geophysicists and sedimentologists who have been collecting evidence about the KT extinction over the last 20 years. Geological records show that the event that triggered the extinction destroyed marine and land ecosystems rapidly, according to the researchers, who conclude that the Chicxulub asteroid impact is the only plausible explanation for this.
Despite evidence for relatively active volcanism in Deccan Traps at the time, marine and land ecosystems showed only minor changes within the 500,000 years before the time of the KT extinction. Furthermore, computer models and observational data suggest that the release of gases such as sulphur into the atmosphere after each volcanic eruption in the Deccan Traps would have had a short lived effect on the planet. These would not cause enough damage to create a rapid mass extinction of land and marine species.
Dr Joanna Morgan, co-author of the review from the Department of Earth Science and Engineering at Imperial College London, said: "We now have great confidence that an asteroid was the cause of the KT extinction. This triggered large-scale fires, earthquakes measuring more than 10 on the Richter scale, and continental landslides, which created tsunamis. However, the final nail in the coffin for the dinosaurs happened when blasted material was ejected at high velocity into the atmosphere. This shrouded the planet in darkness and caused a global winter, killing off many species that couldn't adapt to this hellish environment."
Dr Gareth Collins, Natural Environment Research Council Fellow and another co-author from the Department of Earth Science and Engineering at Imperial College London, added: "The asteroid was about the size of the Isle of Wight and hit Earth 20 times faster than a speeding bullet. The explosion of hot rock and gas would have looked like a huge ball of fire on the horizon, grilling any living creature in the immediate vicinity that couldn't find shelter. Ironically, while this hellish day signalled the end of the 160 million year reign of the dinosaurs, it turned out to be a great day for mammals, who had lived in the shadow of the dinosaurs prior to this event. The KT extinction was a pivotal moment in Earth's history, which ultimately paved the way for humans to become the dominant species on Earth."
In the review, the panel sifted through past studies to analyse the evidence that linked the asteroid impact and volcanic activity with the KT extinction. One key piece of evidence was the abundance of iridium in geological samples around the world from the time of the extinction. Iridium is very rare in Earth's crust and very common in asteroids. Immediately after the iridium layer, there is a dramatic decline in fossil abundance and species, indicating that the KT extinction followed very soon after the asteroid hit.
Another direct link between the asteroid impact and the extinction is evidence of 'shocked' quartz in geological records. Quartz is shocked when hit very quickly by a massive force and these minerals are only found at nuclear explosion sites and at meteorite impacts sites. The team say that an abundance of shocked quartz in rock layers all around the world at the KT boundary lends further weight to their conclusions that a massive meteorite impact happened at the time of the mass extinction.
The panel was able to discount previous studies that suggested that the Chicxulub impact occurred 300,000 years prior to the KT extinction. The researchers say that these studies had misinterpreted geological data that was gathered close to the Chicxulub impact site. This is because the rocks close to the impact zone underwent complex geological processes after the initial asteroid collision, which made it difficult to interpret the data correctly.
Things explained in the canopy theory large sized animals legions of frozen mammoths
"Such confounding enigmas, not only about the mammoth and the mammoth steppe fauna, but also about the ice age itself, have naturally produced many hypotheses. Early scientists produced a lot of confused writing. For example, Sir Henry Howorth,7,12 who gathered copious observations from Siberian explorers that are considered fairly accurate, believed the mammoths met their demise in a continental-scale flood, but that this flood was not Noah’s Flood"
"The existence of carcasses with identifiable stomach remains and well-preserved bones and tusks has suggested a ‘quick-freeze’ to many. This has been reinforced by the research of the Birds Eye Frozen Foods Company, which calculated a sudden fall to below -100°C based on heat conduction.103" Michael Ooard The extinction of the woolly mammoth: was it a quick freeze?
Michael Oard actually opposes the quick freeze theory due to the fact that many carcasses have decayed besides the frozen ones. However in the Hovind theory, the iceage would have taken place prior to the flood. due to impact from frozen asteroids upon the ice canopy. The waters of the flood would have eroded many of the carcases before refreezing which would allow for the not as frozen carcases.
"Could the animals have lived in Siberia today during the relatively warm summer, perhaps migrating there from the south? The temperature likely would have been pleasant for them, but the environment deadly. Siberia today is in the permafrost zone where up to a metre of the surface melts in the summer. Water pools on the surface forming massive bogs and muskegs, making summer travel difficult, if not impossible, for man and beast.44,45 Tolmachoff 46 states that a few inches of this sticky mud makes the substrate practically impassable for a man, and that a foot or more would probably trap a mammoth.
Siberia may be lush with vegetation in the summer, but it is the wrong type. Although there are patches of grass, bog and muskeg vegetation predominates, and these are low in nutrition for grazers.47 The taiga forest vegetation south of the current tundra is also poorly digestible for grazers.48 Comparing living elephants to mammoths, the daily requirement for a woolly mammoth would have been about 200 to 300 kg of succulent vegetation49 and 130–190 litres of water! Vereshchagin50 flatly declares: ‘Neither mammoth nor bison could exist in the sort of tundra that exists there [in Siberia] today.’"
So if Siberia were a warmer climate, then perhaps the ice was added to the environement when a group of frozen meteorites hit the earth shattering the ice canopy.
So if there was a crystaline canopy, a meteor shattered it. The stellar ice particles would have been pulled by the powerful magnetic field to the north and south poles. The impact would have started the earth to wabble as it rotated, thus causing seasons. The lack of metalic frozen hydrogen would have distorted the earths magnetic field triggoring the break down of the earth's tectonic plates. This would have caused the continental plates to sink and the flood to cover the earth. the New environment would have made things rough for man and animals. men would not live so long. The large animals would get smaller etc. etc
How do we understand the debate of canopy verses non-canopy creation scientist?
It is my viewpoint that a canopy understanding of creation is a more biblical interpretation. Also that a crystaline Canopy theory (as I have seen from Kent Hovind) is the best current creation science model.
While I hold that the canopy theory is more biblical. I do not find non-canopy young earth creationist to be false teachers, nor unbiblical. It is a detail in the genesis account that does not have any strong doctrinal consequences.
In terms of science, this is indeed a proof that creation science is indeed a science. because science experiments and test theories and hypothesis. We have now several flood geology models. (water clouds, water vapor, crystalline, plate tectonics, and arabic local flood) this shows that science is enchance by biblical christianity and not hindered.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)