Everyone has a religion

[PruePhillip]

The last time earth was covered in liquid was when it was molten rock.

There has never been a time when it was an ocean planet.

Arguably there is more water on earth now than ever before, carried here on meteorites.

Here is how much water there is on earth now.

View attachment 23327

Not necessarily brought by meteorites or comets - there's plenty of water in the earth's crust.
Venus lost its oceans so its crustal subduction system stopped working. It's this system that gave earth its lighter rock which floats on dense basalt - granite. As far as we know, earth alone has granite.
And this is where we get that verse in Gen 1:9 "... let dry ground appear.” And it was so. God called the dry ground “land,” and the gathered waters he called “seas.”

 

[PruePhillip]

The last time earth was covered in liquid was when it was molten rock.

There has never been a time when it was an ocean planet.

Arguably there is more water on earth now than ever before, carried here on meteorites.

Here is how much water there is on earth now.

View attachment 23327

Yes, some say there could have been "small islands" (est max 2-3% of the earth's surface with little or any elevation) but the continents simply didn't exist. It was, pure and simple, a water world that Kevin Kostner would be at home with.

 

[viole]

Some might "carve idols out of fear and call it God" but my reading of the Gospels suggests nothing of the sort.
Stating the universe "had no beginning" is neither science or non-science - we just don't know. But my gut feeling is that it's avoiding the question. Certainly it doesn't answer the question 'Why something instead of nothing?'

As I see it (and I have a science background) it's like this: once the universe got going we are able to make amazing predictions and learn wonderful insights into it all. But as to how and why it came to being we cannot ever know.

Well, if we don't know than it is for sure premature to claim that there is a first cause, and that it is uncaused (assuming, again, that we are using an old ontology of time).

But the answer to the fundamental question "why something instead of nothing?" is very simple: why not?

So, you are a Christian (I presume) because you have strong evidence that Jesus was really who He claimed to be. But if that is the case, why do venture in complicated arguments involving uncaused causes, cosmology, and ontology?

Ciao

- viole

 

[PruePhillip]

Well, if we don't know than it is for sure premature to claim that there is a first cause, and that it is uncaused (assuming, again, that we are using an old ontology of time).

But the answer to the fundamental question "why something instead of nothing?" is very simple: why not?

So, you are a Christian (I presume) because you have strong evidence that Jesus was really who He claimed to be. But if that is the case, why do venture in complicated arguments involving uncaused causes, cosmology, and ontology?

Ciao

- viole

Yes, a Christian. I don't need, nor want ever want, "proof" for Jesus as Messiah. That must come through faith and only faith can do a work in your life.
Even His own brothers and sisters did not believe in him.
Saying "why not" about the universe isn't an answer. I love the cosmology stuff because I am a geek. I resent the way religion is exploited.
Listened to a scientist once talking about things we can't know and how to be careful in what we say in the name of science. And then he spoiled it all by rubbishing the idea of God - he was doing just what he told others not to do.

 

[ChristineM]

Not necessarily brought by meteorites or comets - there's plenty of water in the earth's crust.
Venus lost its oceans so its crustal subduction system stopped working. It's this system that gave earth its lighter rock which floats on dense basalt - granite. As far as we know, earth alone has granite.
And this is where we get that verse in Gen 1:9 "... let dry ground appear.” And it was so. God called the dry ground “land,” and the gathered waters he called “seas.”

I provided a image of how much water is on earth. No there is not plenty of water in earths crust. For one, the deeper one travels into the earths crust the hotter it gets. Remember water boils. There is some water in earths crust so think about fluid dynamics.

What is the venus straw man to do with anything. We are discussing earth

Evidence has been found for Granite on mars so your "as far as we know" is superceded.

Using the bible a a source for geology is not the best tactic.

 

[ChristineM]

Yes, some say there could have been "small islands" (est max 2-3% of the earth's surface with little or any elevation) but the continents simply didn't exist. It was, pure and simple, a water world that Kevin Kostner would be at home with.

Please provide citation.

 

[PruePhillip]

I provided a image of how much water is on earth. No there is not plenty of water in earths crust. For one, the deeper one travels into the earths crust the hotter it gets. Remember water boils. There is some water in earths crust so think about fluid dynamics.

What is the venus straw man to do with anything. We are discussing earth

Evidence has been found for Granite on mars so your "as far as we know" is superceded.

Using the bible a a source for geology is not the best tactic.

Interesting - I looked up granite and Mars. This is more evidence that Mars had an ocean once.
I recall that the earth's mantle holds about one ocean's worth of water.
I mention Venus 'cos I am a science geek.

 

[PruePhillip]

Please provide citation.

Couldn't find it with the time I have. I searched for one Nicolas Flament who worked on this.
Not sure how deep this global ocean would have been - no time to look it up. And it presumes the current amount of water - which is not known.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ea...world-like-the-one-depicted-by-Hollywood.html

 

[ChristineM]

Interesting - I looked up granite and Mars. This is more evidence that Mars had an ocean once.
I recall that the earth's mantle holds about one ocean's worth of water.
I mention Venus 'cos I am a science geek.

Granite is formed from slow crystallisation of earths magma... No water required.

One ocean is not so much in relation to all oceans, groundwater, atmospheric water etc.

Attempting to learn science from the bible is doomed to failure.

 

[PruePhillip]

Granite is formed from slow crystallisation of earths magma... No water required.

One ocean is not so much in relation to all oceans, groundwater, atmospheric water etc.

Attempting to learn science from the bible is doomed to failure.

My understanding is that the oceans facilitated the movement (subduction) of the crust. This helped to form granite. Without sea floor spreading there can't be bulk granite.
No, we don't learn science from the bible. But the bible is not like other religious texts.
And when it is quoted in support of science, it is often misquoted. Witness the Galileo trial where the Pope quote Solomon about the sun rising and setting. That is true on the basis of the observer (like seeing the earth rise on the moon) but it wasn't what Galileo meant.

 

[ChristineM]

Couldn't find it with the time I have. I searched for one Nicolas Flament who worked on this.
Not sure how deep this global ocean would have been - no time to look it up. And it presumes the current amount of water - which is not known.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ea...world-like-the-one-depicted-by-Hollywood.html

Not heard of Nicolas Flament so looked him up on arxiv. He only seems to have 1 paper published which is irrelevant to waterworld scenario
https://arxiv.org/search/?query=Nicolas+Flament+&searchtype=author&source=header
Maybe he has an idea but could not validate it so dropped it

Ehm... I provided a schematic showing the amount of water on earth.

Here is the USGS take on how much water exists https://water.usgs.gov/edu/earthhowmuch.html

 

[viole]

Yes, a Christian. I don't need, nor want ever want, "proof" for Jesus as Messiah. That must come through faith and only faith can do a work in your life.
Even His own brothers and sisters did not believe in him.
Saying "why not" about the universe isn't an answer. I love the cosmology stuff because I am a geek. I resent the way religion is exploited.
Listened to a scientist once talking about things we can't know and how to be careful in what we say in the name of science. And then he spoiled it all by rubbishing the idea of God - he was doing just what he told others not to do.

Well, I think it is an answer. It tries to defuse the hidden assumption that "nothing" is more natural than "something", and that therefore "something" needs an explanation. But this is obviously logically unsubstantiated.

And it does not solve the problem. For I could ask "why God instead of no God?". You will say: because God does not, by definition, need an explanation. He is necessary. He is the necessity for "something" to exist. But this is special pleading and question begging, since I could then equally say that "something" is necessary and does not need an explanation, either, with the same exact evidence or logic.

Ergo, the dilemma "why something instead of nothing" is useless as evidence for God.

Ciao

- viole

 

[PruePhillip]

Well, I think it is an answer. It tries to defuse the hidden assumption that "nothing" is more natural than "something", and that therefore "something" needs an explanation. But this is obviously logically unsubstantiated.

And it does not solve the problem. For I could ask "why God instead of no God?". You will say: because God does not, by definition, need an explanation. He is necessary. He is the necessity for "something" to exist. But this is special pleading and question begging, since I could then equally say that "something" is necessary and does not need an explanation, either, with the same exact evidence or logic.

Ergo, the dilemma "why something instead of nothing" is useless as evidence for God.

Ciao

- viole

I see the two questions re origin of the natural world and origin of God as being fundamentally different.
Different because we are talking about the "natural world" and where it came from.
I know little about God or the realm of God outside of time and space - we can't comprehend that. You have no clues as to where to even begin to grasp this realm. How can one exist outside of time, for instance!
But the natural world IS evident, and it is the question at stake.

 

[viole]

Different because we are talking about the "natural world" and where it came from.

Suppose I tell you that the natural world does not need to come from. That it simply is, and that assuming that it cannot exist without a cause, or an explanation, is question begging.

How would you attack this?

Ciao

- viole

 

[ChristineM]

My understanding is that the oceans facilitated the movement (subduction) of the crust. This helped to form granite. Without sea floor spreading there can't be bulk granite.
No, we don't learn science from the bible. But the bible is not like other religious texts.
And when it is quoted in support of science, it is often misquoted. Witness the Galileo trial where the Pope quote Solomon about the sun rising and setting. That is true on the basis of the observer (like seeing the earth rise on the moon) but it wasn't what Galileo meant.

I understand it differently, it [granite] forms from the slow crystallization of magma below Earth's surface.
https://geology.com/rocks/granite.shtml

From magma that is rich in Silica, it cools down without reaching the surface. Because it remains beneath the surface as it is cooling it forms large crystals.

It does form in subduction zones which tend to be water rich.

 

[PruePhillip]

Suppose I tell you that the natural world does not need to come from. That it simply is, and that assuming that it cannot exist without a cause, or an explanation, is question begging.

How would you attack this?

Ciao

- viole

Imagine me writing thus:
"The rain does not need to come from. Rain simply is, and that assuming that it cannot exist without a cause, or an explanation, is question begging."

We say there are no miracles.
But if, as we say, every effect has a preceding cause, then we must treat all physical phenomena in a similar manner. Why can't we do it with the Big Bang or whatever preceded it?
We lay down the challenge to religion with our 'cause and effect' - then we must answer religion's challenge about the Initial Cause, as we have challenged them.

 

[viole]

Imagine me writing thus:
"The rain does not need to come from. Rain simply is, and that assuming that it cannot exist without a cause, or an explanation, is question begging."

Rain is part of the natural system. It is not the natural system. You are committing the composition fallacy: transmitting the property of the constituents to the whole. For instance: if a box contains only red balls, the box is not necessarily a red ball. Same thing with the Universe/Nature, if all constituents of the Universe/Nature appear to come from, that does not entail that the Universe/Nature needs to come from.

So, my challenge remains. What's next?

Ciao

- viole

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Everyone has a religion of some sort.

Except for those of us who don't.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

There has never been a time when it was an ocean planet.

According to the Bible, at 15 cubits (Genesis 7:20), only about half of the height of the arc, the world was never flooded or an ocean planet. Mount Ararat, it would seem, is better suited to bear the name of "Ant Hill Ararat."

 

[ChristineM]

According to the Bible, at 15 cubits (Genesis 7:20), only about half of the height of the arc, the world was never flooded or an ocean planet. Mount Ararat, it would seem, is better suited to bear the name of "Ant Hill Ararat."

I believe the 15 cubits was above the highest mountain, Everest.

Ararat would have been levelled by water erosion.