Talk:Lunar bukkake hypothesis
|
This global flood related article has been awarded BRONZE status for quality. It's getting there, but could be better with improvement. See RationalWiki:Article rating for more information. |
| ||
|
| ||||
Steam[edit]
I took out a section earlier because I had trouble understanding how it all fit together. I sort of get what it's trying to say - calculating the energy required or released from steam, but it wasn't really clear enough to figure out. 
d hominem
12:19, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
Other YECs[edit]
Has this... argument... seen use by any creationists other than Neph? Frostbyte (talk) 09:24, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
- Hydroplate 'theory' in general, yes, that's practically mainstream. And a few saying that the water accounts for comets. Not many specifically go so far as to use that as the direct explanation of how the moon is covered in craters. Don't click here 09:38, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
- Was primarily curious about this particular variation. Grazie. Frostbyte (talk) 02:14, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
- AiG specifically says the moon was hit by meteors, not comets nor water. But I did find this bit of derp Don't click here 08:39, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
- "[H]it by craters"?
- Re the AiG link: why the EFF would a god who, forget not, only slightly before created earth, sun, moon, planets and stars ex nihilo, need meteors to perform such a trivial task as splitting a planet's crust? These folk make me ill. Scream!! (talk) 09:42, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
- They're using the trappings of science to try to prove the Bible, which kind of misses the whole point. SophieWilder 09:55, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
- Tyop. Fixed it. Don't click here 10:20, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
- Tyop. Fixed it.
- They're using the trappings of science to try to prove the Bible, which kind of misses the whole point. SophieWilder
- AiG specifically says the moon was hit by meteors, not comets nor water. But I did find this bit of derp
- Was primarily curious about this particular variation. Grazie. Frostbyte (talk) 02:14, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
Uses of the bukkake[edit]
A very good Scrabble word if you get both blanks and can a clearance out of it. 86.191.125.232 (talk) 22:29, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
My two cents (again)[edit]
I don't see at all why they're obsessed with the Great Flood when it shows the worst of God -basically not omnipotent and unable to clean the mess in other way- --93.191.139.9 (talk) 09:16, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
Is this theory[edit]
Moonshine?
Or did the water go via Crammer? Anna Livia (talk) 15:26, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
Compressive Heating[edit]
Additional, er, minor scientific issue, seems to need a section:
A recent documentary about the demise of the dinosaurs showed that after the "dinosaur killer" asteroid hit, cubic miles of seawater were thrown out into space - and then fell back. When it hit, there were heating effects that killed anything within some meters of the surface.
Assuming the posited thick layer of water is ejected into space, one would expect much of it to fall back, causing heating effects. As the bukakke 'hypothesis' requires far more water to be ejected into space than would have occurred for the dinosaur killer, it seems reasonable to expect far more water to fall back and create far greater heating effects. EngineeringType (talk) 12:19, 26 August 2022 (UTC)