Septextura
Well-known member
Only location on Earth where brimstone is found with 96-98% purity (40% elsewhere). It's highly flammable and expels toxic fumes.
What is the purity of sulfur in Texas and Louisiana? It is described as native sulfur, so I assume pretty high (more than, say, 70%).Only location on Earth where brimstone is found with 96-98% purity (40% elsewhere). It's highly flammable and expels toxic fumes.
The Oil Patch.Only location on Earth where brimstone is found with 96-98% purity (40% elsewhere). It's highly flammable and expels toxic fumes.
Nice bundle of speculation.What is the purity of sulfur in Texas and Louisiana? It is described as native sulfur, so I assume pretty high (more than, say, 70%).
Also, as far as I know, the locations of Sodom and Gomorrah are not know, so kind of odd this guy can be sure these sulfur stones come from there.
Also, if it happened as the Bible describes, the sulfur would no longer be in its native form. As you say, sulfur is "highly flammable". The destruction of a city by fire and brimstone is going to lead to all the brimstone (i.e., sulfur) being consumed in the fire. The fact that there is native sulfur proves this cannot be Sodom or Gomorrah
So where is the volcano that the brimstone came from?Nice bundle of speculation.
You started with an unproven conclusion and spin your speculation to affirm your bias.
You have not proven anything.
It is simple chemistry, Authie. As the OP states, sulfur is "highly flammable".Nice bundle of speculation.
You started with an unproven conclusion and spin your speculation to affirm your bias.
You have not proven anything.
One of our regions absolute most famous and successful Petroleum Geophysicists with a consulting practice is a Young Earth Born again Creationist. His education is beyond Masters of Science. He used my connections to leave Texaco.Only location on Earth where brimstone is found with 96-98% purity (40% elsewhere). It's highly flammable and expels toxic fumes.
So what has that got to do with the S&G story, and whether or not it is just an imaginative story based on a volcanic eruption such as Santorini c1450 BC and the demise of the Minoan civilization?One of our regions absolute most famous and successful Petroleum Geophysicists with a consulting practice is a Young Earth Born again Creationist. His education is beyond Masters of Science. He used my connections to leave Texaco.
I know a lot of Independent Oil men and over the the years when oil business crashes and drillers go broke, they end up big time in churches. If you really study geology, there are so many questions that just don't have answers.
"How can uniformitarianism demonstrate development of a sub sea pay zone discovered with a well TD 5800 m at a water depth of 3400 m"?
90 foot pay zone
How did all the salt domes under Louisiana get deposited? I guess there are dozens of salt domes. Our America petroleum reserves are stored there underground.
The more science
we learn we discover more that supports the Bible and even more scientists just can't explain.
You really come up with some imaginative nonsense.One of our regions absolute most famous and successful Petroleum Geophysicists with a consulting practice is a Young Earth Born again Creationist. His education is beyond Masters of Science. He used my connections to leave Texaco.
blah blah blah
Also, as far as I know, the locations of Sodom and Gomorrah are not know, so kind of odd this guy can be sure these sulfur stones come from there.
Not necessarily.Also, if it happened as the Bible describes, the sulfur would no longer be in its native form. As you say, sulfur is "highly flammable". The destruction of a city by fire and brimstone is going to lead to all the brimstone (i.e., sulfur) being consumed in the fire. The fact that there is native sulfur proves this cannot be Sodom or Gomorrah
So first you cite a location where a meteor exploded in the air, then you say there was sulfur in the ground in mineral deposits. Which is it? Was the sulfur arriving from above? Or was it underground?![]()
Where Is Sodom?
So where is Sodom, according to the Biblical geography of Genesis 13? The large oval-shaped, fertile plain just north of the Dead Sea....www.biblicalarchaeology.org
![]()
Evidence of Sodom? Meteor blast cause of biblical destruction, say scientists
Multi-disciplinary team of scientists uses 3,700-year-old archaeological evidence from Jordan's Tall el-Hammam Excavation Project to understand end to civilization near Dead Seawww.timesofisrael.com
Not necessarily.
It's been a few thousand years since the event took place. There could've been sulfur in the ground there, and as the dead sea has long been known to be a mineral rich environment, there's no valid reason why this is not the case.
Hey, I provided a valid basis for an historical event. If you don't want to know, then save yourself the humiliation.So first you cite a location where a meteor exploded in the air, then you say there was sulfur in the ground in mineral deposits. Which is it? Was the sulfur arriving from above? Or was it underground?
Or is this the usual Christian trick. Go with which ever story makes sense at the time. When you need about rationalise, just cite something else. Who cares if it contradicts what you said previous?
This is, of course, the Christian version of critical thinking.
You provided a valid basis for an historical event, fair enough. Maybe the event was inspired by a meteor; I find that perfectly plausible.Hey, I provided a valid basis for an historical event. If you don't want to know, then save yourself the humiliation.
As far as critical thinking goes, I'm definitely not seeing you present anything beyond simply denying what you don't want to know about.
And again, I find that plausible. I do not think God did it, though I cannot rule that out entirely, but I find it quite believable that the event in the Bible is trying to explain such an impactWhat I do see is that you've imposed your own ideas on what the bible actually says took place.
23 The sun had risen upon the earth when Lot entered Zoar. 24 Then the LORD rained brimstone and fire on Sodom and Gomorrah, from the LORD out of the heavens. 25 So He overthrew those cities, all the plain, all the inhabitants of the cities, and what grew on the ground.
It doesn't say what the cause was, beyond God raining brimstone fire on Sodom and Gomorrah.
It seems to me that a meteor exploding in the air would indeed result in the raining of brimstone and fire. No different than what took place 112 years ago with the Tunguska event.
Right, I am biased to explanations that make sense and that are coherent. But that is because I clearly have a better understanding of the world than you do. Hey, I know positrons do not bounce off electrons.But, hey. I get it. Bias runs deep with folks like you. God forbid you'd actually learn something intelligent, which causes you to grow in understanding of the world in which you live.
I said it's possible, because there are large deposits of minerals in the region, and I then provided some descriptions, and examples of this.You provided a valid basis for an historical event, fair enough. Maybe the event was inspired by a meteor; I find that perfectly plausible.
But then you flipped that around entirely, and said the sulfur was in mineral deposit underground. Which was it Steve?
No. You misread what I stated.These are two different and incompatible scenarios. And yet you flip from one to the other as convenient.
What I find curious is that God showed up, and told Abraham he would do it, and was motivated to get Lot, and his family out of Sodom/Gomorrah, to spare them.And again, I find that plausible. I do not think God did it, though I cannot rule that out entirely, but I find it quite believable that the event in the Bible is trying to explain such an impact
Here's an anecdotal narrative in which sulfur smell is residual to the normal activities of the region.What is not plausible is that native sulfur is still present on the site of that event.
Sulfur requires a heat source to ignite. It's stable up to 160°C. It auto-ignites at 232°C. (320°-450°F)That is just not going to happen. As the OP say, sulfur is highly flammable. It is ALL going to burn. Watch that first video, it actually shows sulfur burning. There is no way these sulfur balls came from a burning meteor.
You really are anal. I said their COULD'VE been.... I didn't say there was.And let us not forget that out of the other side of your mouth you are saying the sulfur is underground:
"It's been a few thousand years since the event took place. There could've been sulfur in the ground there, and as the dead sea has long been known to be a mineral rich environment, there's no valid reason why this is not the case."
Which is it Steve? Did it come from the meteor? Or mineral deposits? Oh, right. Whatever is convenient to your argument at the moment.
And yet, here you are, getting your panties in a wad.Right, I am biased to explanations that make sense and that are coherent. But that is because I clearly have a better understanding of the world than you do. Hey, I know positrons do not bounce off electrons.
I'm not the one who isn't doing the research to verify my statements. I've provided you with numerous scientific, anecdotal, and historical sources. There's nothing preventing you from doing your own.Hence, I reject your nonsense. It does not make sense for native sulfur to survive a meteoric fireball. It is not coherent for the sulfur to come from both the meteor and mineral deposits.
I'm not the one living in a fantasy world.So, yes. I am strongly biased against your nonsense fantasy.
I have a far more intelligent idea.God forbid you should come up with anything that make sense.
IOW the S&G story is just another imaginative fantasy about a god sharing a non-kosher meal with Abraham, and having a face to face chat about the number of righteous children in Gomorrah, and how the god then walked down to Gomorrah to count them for itself since it was neither an omniscient or omnipresent type of god.What I find curious is that God showed up, and told Abraham he would do it, and was motivated to get Lot, and his family out of Sodom/Gomorrah, to spare them.
God didn't have to warn his friend. God didn't HAVE to listen to Abe's pleas for sparing the righteous from the judgment of the wicked. But God did warn his friend that he was going to judge the wicked, and he did listen to Abe's pleas to spare the righteous from the judgment of the wicked.
So, whether you think that's the case or not does not mean that God did not do it.
It's an historical even that the bible says took place during Abe's lifetime.
But how does that fit with the sulfur coming from space, via a meteor.I said it's possible, because there are large deposits of minerals in the region, and I then provided some descriptions, and examples of this.
Which is consistent with mineral deposits.Here's an anecdotal narrative in which sulfur smell is residual to the normal activities of the region.
![]()
Sulfur smell - Dead Sea Region Forum - Tripadvisor
Answer 1 of 5: I heard that the Dead Sea can leave a sulfur smell in your swimming suit that cannot be removed. Is that true? If so, can anyone tell me if it will also affect my Teva sandals? (I just got them for my trip to Israel and I don't want to ruin them...www.tripadvisor.com
Here's a research paper on the topic.
![]()
Fire and Brimstone: The Microbially Mediated Formation of Elemental Sulfur Nodules from an Isotope and Major Element Study in the Paleo-Dead Sea
We present coupled sulfur and oxygen isotope data from sulfur nodules and surrounding gypsum, as well as iron and manganese concentration data, from the Lisan Formation near the Dead Sea (Israel). The sulfur isotope composition in the nodules ranges between ...www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
And another.
But you said it was burning. Remember this?Sulfur requires a heat source to ignite. It's stable up to 160°C. It auto-ignites at 232°C. (320°-450°F)
The MSDS sheet provided by West Liberty University in West Virginia says that the flashpoint is 205°C
Sure, you can watch the first video to see a guy handling it.I remember playing with it as a child, and while it would burn when I took a match to it, it wasn't explosive, nor was it something I became afraid of in handling it.
Do you still think it could have been a meteor? Or have you now realised that that makes no sense? You tell me Steve. I can only go on what you say, and your last statement with regards to the meteor hypothesis is that you think it is plausible.You really are anal. I said their COULD'VE been.... I didn't say there was.
So what? What do you think you have proved here, Steve?I'm not the one who isn't doing the research to verify my statements. I've provided you with numerous scientific, anecdotal, and historical sources. There's nothing preventing you from doing your own.
My search parameters for this post's links are
"is sulfur in the ground around the dead sea?"
"flashpoint of sulfur"
Oh, here we go. The poor Christian martyr, persecuted because he spouts incoherent nonsense.So, lose the attitude. It makes you look like a bully.
Unlike meteorites and exploding asteroids or meteoroids, meteors are tiny and burn up in the upper atmosphere.Hey, I provided a valid basis for an historical event. If you don't want to know, then save yourself the humiliation.
As far as critical thinking goes, I'm definitely not seeing you present anything beyond simply denying what you don't want to know about.
What I do see is that you've imposed your own ideas on what the bible actually says took place.
23 The sun had risen upon the earth when Lot entered Zoar. 24 Then the LORD rained brimstone and fire on Sodom and Gomorrah, from the LORD out of the heavens. 25 So He overthrew those cities, all the plain, all the inhabitants of the cities, and what grew on the ground.
It doesn't say what the cause was, beyond God raining brimstone fire on Sodom and Gomorrah.
It seems to me that a meteor exploding in the air would indeed result in the raining of brimstone and fire. No different than what took place 112 years ago with the Tunguska event.
But, hey. I get it. Bias runs deep with folks like you. God forbid you'd actually learn something intelligent, which causes you to grow in understanding of the world in which you live.
What's wrong Pixie?As we go though this, I want to keep in mind what Steve said previously, in post #13:
It seems to me that a meteor exploding in the air would indeed result in the raining of brimstone and fire. No different than what took place 112 years ago with the Tunguska event.
Just a couple of days ago, Steve's position was that the destruction of Sodom could be due to a meteor exploding above the city, raining for and sulfur (brimstone).
But how does that fit with the sulfur coming from space, via a meteor.
It seems to me that a meteor exploding in the air would indeed result in the raining of brimstone and fire. No different than what took place 112 years ago with the Tunguska event.
Which is consistent with mineral deposits.
But not with a meteor.
Have you now abandoned the meteor Steve?
Hot enough to blast you where you stand.But you said it was burning. Remember this?
It seems to me that a meteor exploding in the air would indeed result in the raining of brimstone and fire. No different than what took place 112 years ago with the Tunguska event.
How hot do you think an exploding meteor is, Steve?
You really need to learn how to think.Sure, you can watch the first video to see a guy handling it.
But YOU said it was in an exploding meteor. That is, a meteor that has got so hot whilst falling into the atmosphere that it instantly vapoured. You really think the sulfur did not burn in that?
I think it is exactly whatever it actually was when it happened.Do you still think it could have been a meteor? Or have you now realised that that makes no sense? You tell me Steve. I can only go on what you say, and your last statement with regards to the meteor hypothesis is that you think it is plausible.
Pity. You should learn to realize that we have no idea, and only have the results of the actual event that occurred.I say it is not, because it is not possible for native sulfur to survive such an explosion.
This just tells me that unless it fits your biases, what actually took place could not have taken place.On the one hand if you have a location with mineral deposits of sulfur, but nothing to actually link it to Sodom. On the other hand you have your meteor. Two half explanations, that each sounds half-way plausible. Put them together and you have... something that makes no sense.
That you're more interested in being right than in learning how reality actually happens.So what? What do you think you have proved here, Steve?
Well then!Sure, there are mineral deposits of sulfur around that area. But that in no way suggests a city was ever destroyed in the manner the Bible describes.
I didn't say that the entire situation was fully understood. From the articles I provided, they're still working through it.Sure, the flash point of sulfur is 232°C. That in no way suggests native sulfur will survive an exploding meteor.
Yep. Because I wasn't there.Again, you have two half explanations. When I point out sulfur burns, you head to your mineral deposits. When I point out the Biblical account, you head to the meteor. Great, you can explain everything.
This is part of your problem.But putting together two half-explanations does not necessarily give you one full explanation. In this case the two halves contradict each other.
You're the one who is acting like you were there.Oh, here we go. The poor Christian martyr, persecuted because he spouts incoherent nonsense.
I'm not the one who wants to be right.How about you settle on one scenario; tell us what that is, and show us the evidence for that. If you have now abandoned the meteor BS, man up and say so.