Noah Movie and Global Warming
The movie called Noah (by Darren Aronofsky) has achieved recent notoriety. The movie used a few of the character names mentioned in the biblical account of the flood and involved a ship. The entire portrayal was fictional. Many were disappointed at its characterization of Noah as something of a villain. Apparently, the people that made the movie felt free to take liberties because they thought the entire flood was common mythology.
The actual biblical story is perfectly true as written. With that said, some of what is thought true about the flood is in fact mythology. A few of the closely held traditions about the flood stem from the mythology of modern religion and are non-biblical. It was a global deluge but is portrayed fictionally by religions as well. The religious machinery maintains their myths by implying hell’s fire and damnation for considerations to the contrary.
Some are now suggesting that the cataclysm as portrayed in the movie could occur due to global warming. Although not possible, a study of the atmosphere explains Noah’s deluge.
What caused the real flood? What caused Noah’s flood?
An atmospheric disturbance, stemming from some unknown, caused atmospheric pressure to drop rather suddenly- perhaps over a few days. The pressure drop caused gases saturated in ground waters to boil out of saturation- just as happens with carbonated drinks. This forced water to come up out of the ground. Heat carried out of the ground by the water began a cooling trend that would leave Earth permanently cooler.
Completely predictably, torrential rains ensued for 40 days and nights. The rain amounted to 15 cubits (about 24 feet) – hardly enough to cover mountaintops. Both seawater and fog (or cloud cover) are called water in Genesis.
As the event ended and when Noah’s ship was aground, water still covered the mountains. This could be true only if the mountains were covered by fog. It was fog but is called water in Genesis, just as is seawater- hence the mythology of modern religion. Some who are religious are largely responsible for all fictional portrayals of epic biblical stories- they cherish their own fictional accounts.
Earth is a planet immersed in refrigerant and as such, it reacts predictably to changes in temperature and pressure. The refrigerant covering Earth is water.
The global atmospheric pressure drop of Noah’s flood, no matter what the cause, had resulted in an extensive rain; a rain that would last until Earth had cooled off sufficiently to bring the rain cycle back to normal but at cooler global temperatures; temperatures consistent with the lower atmospheric pressure. This all stems directly from the refrigerant properties of water with fixed solar energy.
Under the conditions of the flood, seas were very calm, wind was nonexistent, and much of the ground level gases were poisonous. All outside Noah’s ship would have died due to exposure, poisonous gases, and perhaps a few by drowning. Conditions were foggy and overcast. A large wooden ship could easily survive the calm seas and low winds of such a pressure drop.
After the flood, rainbows were occasionally visible in the sky as they are today. For visibility, rainbows require low-level clouds- again consistent with what had been an atmospheric pressure drop. As a direct result of lower atmospheric pressure, airborne water vapor could reach its cloud forming dew point at lower atmospheric levels. Once the rain cycle reached a normal level of activity, temperatures had settled to cooler levels globally.
The opposite scenario of warmer global temperatures or global warming, will occur only if atmospheric pressure goes up. Under changing conditions, the rain cycle always reacts in a manner that forces renewed normalcy. Under higher pressure, the evaporation rate of water decreases, cloud cover is nonexistent, and Earth becomes hotter. Heat will increase until sufficient to restore the rain cycle. Once restored to normal at the higher pressure, the rain cycle will overwhelmingly control temperature at Earth’s surface but at a higher temperature. Again, this stems directly from the refrigerant properties of water at fixed solar energy.
At fixed atmospheric pressure, more heat stimulates more evaporation, more rain, and more snow collecting at the poles.
At fixed atmospheric pressure, less heat and reduced surface temperature results in less evaporation, draught conditions, and less snow collecting at the poles.
Neither of the fixed pressure situations matches global warming fears. Only an atmospheric pressure increase can create warmer temperatures and less snow at the poles- at fixed solar energy.
CO2 percentages are irrelevant to temperatures on Earth, but pressure increases due to added CO2 will definitely increase temperature globally. Water as a refrigerant does not react to anything other than pressure and temperature. The question is- is pressure going up due to carbon based fuel consumption? No one seems to be checking. Current investigations are baseless.
The two planets, Venus and Mars clearly prove that gas percentages have no effect on temperature. They have nearly identical gas percentages but exist at wildly different extremes in temperature. Yes, yes, other things are different on the planets- exactly the point one should recognize. Super hot Venus has super high atmospheric pressure.
The other obvious global warming scenario would involve increased solar energy. For whatever reason periodic or otherwise, if increased solar energy is a permanent situation, warmer temperatures will be permanent as well.