FUNDAY

[For reply: The Torah Retold http://qdl.scs-inc.us/?top=5675 ]

RE: Megatsunamis
Wednesday, February 15, 2017 8:03 PM
Lloyd, my responses are "M2" below. - Mike

    _M: Megatsunamis would require a much larger body [than the Moon], and an erratic orbit to induce flow in orthogonal directions.
    =L: What info do you have on the direction of flow of waters that deposited megasequences? All I've read from Baumgardner or another creationist is that the floods swept from the NE to the SW. A catastrophist, Cardona, has said that the flood came from the north. I think he was quoting early Native American sources. The Saturn Theory, based on ancient myths etc, is similar to Velikovsky's theory and provides several planets, especially Venus and Mars, as possible causes of tsunamis, so there could have been planets temporarily orbiting Earth on different orbital planes (See more at the end).

    M2: Flow over North America appears to have been to the SW.  Other parts of the world were different.  This ICR article cites a report of flow to the NE in Siberia -  http://www.icr.org/article/4208/  I don't recall Noah seeing Venus and Mars fighting in the sky or passing so close to the Earth as to rival the Moon in the sky in order to influence tides.  Note that the description in Genesis is that the waters rose and the waters fell.  The Ark was not swept all over the world by high-energy currents; it landed near where it launched in Mesopotamia.

    _M: The Moon would have to be much closer (but beyond the Roche limit) and would only cause water flow along its orbital path.
    =L: Since moons exist within Roche limits and since Mathis reasoned that Roche limits don't exist, do you think he is likely right?

    M2: The Roche limit is basic gravitational astrophysics, simply identifying the point at which the force of tides overcomes the force holding the object together.  Gravity, composition, and volume are all factors.  Seems fairly obvious.

    _M: Paleontologists can distinguish freshwater and saltwater denizens, which still exist today.
    =L: Aren't the dinosaurs considered to be freshwater animals? And yet they appear to have drowned in saltwater. Have they not?

    M2: In the Hell Creek Formation Triceratops, who ate vegetation, are buried with saltwater seashells.  All variety of mixing is evident in the fossil record around the world.

    _M: Clearly the most sweeping megatsunamis would have come from the rising ocean waters as the rain fell since they covered 60% or more of Earth's surface.
    _On the other hand, water rising on the protocontinent would have flowed outward.
    =L: How would rain cause tsunamis? Baumgardner calculated that the sedimentary strata, which average 1.8 km thick, would have needed tsunamis 2.5 km high to transport all the sand and mud etc onto the supercontinent. Why would that not be correct?

    M2: The Moon still caused global tides during the Great Flood.  If you double the amount of water on the Earth over 40 days, the tidal waves become tsunamis.

    _M: The sediment layer on the seafloor averages only .5 km thick.
    =L: Do you have figures on how much of that is solid rock? And do you know which megasequence/s the rock belongs to? The Atlantic shouldn't have any flood-formed strata, should it?

    M2: Seafloor sediment is different than continental sedimentary rock.  It is composed of organics, clay, and minerals that settle to the bottom.  In places, especially near continents, there are the remains of avalanches (turbidites), but there is nothing like the megasequences found on land.

    _M: There are lots of examples of spreading and stretching of continental crust involved in separation, which is another reason that brittle Plate Tectonics is faulty.
    =L: Do you mean the supercontinent was not hardened granite and hardened sedimentary rock when it broke up?

    M2: As with any material, the dominant forces that hold continental crust together change with scale.  While granite and sedimentary rock are brittle on a small scale, at continental scale they are thixotropic.  When agitated with sufficient force, the crust acts as a Bingham Fluid, returning to a coherent solid when the agitating force subsides below the threshold level.

    _M: I think the K-Pg iridium layer and probably the glass spherules are associated with Chicxulub.
    ... It was laid down long before the SD event, which I think produced the Australasian tektite strewnfield.
    =L: Do you have detailed info on that? Isn't the iridium in a layer of clay? And isn't there also charcoal as from a conflagration? And isn't the iridium/clay layer above the layer of spherules? Can you explain that in detail?

    M2: Following the Great Flood the highest surface sedimentary stratum was Cretaceous.  The Chicxulub impact occurred on top of that, depositing iridium, glass spherules, and flame products.  However, researcher Gerta Keller has made a case for the iridium layer and reworked micro-tektites associated with the K-Pg boundary falling 300,000 years (uniformitarian), i.e. 50 cm, after the Chicxulub impact.  That would mean the SD impact produced them instead, and the Chicxulub impact struck at the end of the Great Flood.  The attached chart if from one of her papers.

    _M: What evidence is there that the Moon ever split [to form the supercontinent]?
    =L: All I know is that the Moon is said to have similar composition to Earth's continents, I think, although the mares are said to be basalt. I have a few references on that. What I read today about the Roche limit makes me more confident that close passes of planets, moons, or asteroids would be possible.
    _Mathis says all matter gives off photons that have mass, so when bodies are close enough together they cause tides. He says the force is like pressing down on a beachball in a bathtub. It makes the surrounding waters rise. As the body moves overhead it's photon force is like a beachball moving on the ocean, causing tidal waves around it. So a large enough beachball would make tidal waves large enough to roll over a low-level supercontinent, carrying along sediments. What do you think of that?

    M2: Similar composition of the Moon and Earth relate to the origin of the Moon as a product of a collision with Earth by something else earlier.  There is no reason to think a chunk of Moon later broke off and fell onto Earth to cause the Great Flood.  Celestial bodies have intrinsic mass; photons are not involved.  Gravitational attraction between two of them causes tides, not photonic pressure.

    _M: I haven't heard about fields of mass-containing photons before; aren't photons usually considered to be massless? Where can I find the myths involving Jupiter, Saturn, and the rocky planets interacting before the Great Flood?
    =L: Although conventional science considers photons massless and dimensionless, it makes no sense. The photon would be like a ghost. How could such a thing have any effect on matter?
    _Regarding Saturn Theory myths, one source is http://www.catastrophism.com/intro/search.cgi?zoom_query=
    which does searches of numerous sources, but only like ten lines at a time. Others are http://maverickscience.com and http://saturniancosmology.org/files/thoth
    _The evidence from myths etc suggests that Venus, Mars and Earth were previously satellites of Saturn, moving in single file behind Saturn from distant parts of the solar system to the present orbits. In Kronos magazine in the 1980s probably, Cardona speculated that Jupiter was once close to Earth and its moon Io was the source of the fire and brimstone that fell on Sodom and Gemorrah. He may have abandoned that theory later, but I'm not sure. Anyway, the most ancient myths called Saturn the Sun. Later the name was transferred to the present Sun. This video discusses the theory well: youtube.com/watch?v=t7EAlTcZFwY

    M2: Modern sub-atomic physics is obsessed with particles, which I think is a mistake.  In my and other renegades' opinions, light is only a wave which propagates in space through a medium called "ether".  The wave transfers energy only (which can affect mass), so light is massless.  Modern physics designates light as particles called photons, to which they assign no mass; same result/different paradigm.  Regarding the shuffling around of planetary orbits in the solar system, it would be wise to try to find out if it is physically possible before taking interpretations of myths at face value.  Even if an orbital mechanics scenario could be devised, I doubt it could be resolved over the relatively short time covering human history.