Thursday, February 21, 2019

Understanding the Shorter Route in the Southern Ocean – Part II

Continued from the previous post regarding the critique of a Reader and our responses regarding sailing through the shorter route of the Southern Ocean for Lehi.
• Reader: “Nephi's ship sailed in the Southern Ocean south of Australia and New Zealand, near the cold waters of Antarctica.”
Where Lehi sailed would have been in the northern part of the Southern Ocean where the waters are considerably warmer than further south

Response: In the south Pacific, the cold waters from the east to west Antarctic Coastal Current (around 70º South Latitude) run vertically off the Antarctic continent and along the bottom northward (Bottom Water), while the southward flowing Pacific Ocean flows above that toward the continent (Deep Water). Another current off the Antarctic flows above that (Intermediate Water) to the north or northward, and above that the Pacific Ocean flows along the surface—however, the surface waters flow from north to south, and actually overlay the colder waters below. This means, that as the warmer waters flow southward, the surface temperatures are warmed, thus the colder waters of the Antarctic mix and grow warmer the further away from the Antarctic continent they flow in their northward movement beneath the surface.
Water flow in the Southern Ocean shows surface water moving southward from then equator, bringing warm surface waters southward; the extremely cold waters along the Antarctic coast (Antarctic Coastal Current) flows downward toward the bottom as it flows northward into the Pacific

Along the western South American coast, especially from Chile to northern Peru, these bottom waters flow upward, creating the Humboldt (Peruvian) current that brings enormous nutrients in the upwelling to the surface creating one of the great fishing areas of the world.
    Now, the current that flows west to east in the Southern Ocean flows across about 25º from 40º south latitude to about 65º south latitude. The closer one sails to the 40-45º area the warmer the water. Also, sailing along this latitude would allow a ship “driven forth before the wind” to be turned upward (northward) with the currents off Tierra del Fuego along the continental shelf of South America—the course Nephi’s ship would have taken. That part of the current that does not flow northward along South America, passes through the Drake Passage and into the Atlantic Ocean.
• Reader: “The year-round temperature in the Tasman Sea near Hobart, Australia barely gets above 60F degrees if you're thinking winter in Oman and summer in Australia.”
Response: Actually, the temperature of the Tasman Sea (40º to 50º south latitude) varies—the normal sea temperature from December to February (summer) is 70º F. (“Climate of Launceston (Tasmania),” Bureau of Meteorology Australian Government, Melbourne, Australia). That 70º is far higher than your 60ºF. Conversely, the lowest recorded winter temperature is 8.6ºF.
    In fact, there are times when it is much warmer than normal, stretching clear south of Campbell Island (400 miles due south of the southern tip of New Zealand), as it happens to be at the moment (since late November), due to a heat wave in the Tasman Sea between New Zealand and Australia. The same thing happened last year when the temperature of the sea rose almost 10 degrees through December January and February. It was also similarly recorded in earlier periods back to 1934-1935 (Paul Gorman, “Scientists watching rising Tasman Sea temperatures—again,” December 2018; Dr. Brett Mullan, Principal Climate Scientist for NIWA, The National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research).
• Reader: “But you assume they sailed farther south to catch the Antarctic Circumpolar Current in the Southern Ocean which blows west to east? That's nice, but Brrrrrrr! They must have turned into Popsicles! That's brilliant. Ha ha ha!”
Response: The Lord took Lehi and his party across the Empty Quarter (Rub’ al Khali), the largest sand desert in the world, where the temperatures get as high as 133º F. We’re not sure how you would interpret that, but that is very hot, yet the Lord took them along that route, instead of keeping to the cooler coastal route. And since the Southern Ocean has been sailed regularly today by mariners, with ships using that ocean even as far back in the 17th through 19th centuries in old sailing vessels, one would have to assume that such temperatures, while highly uncomfortable, were not a deterrent to such travel.
The Southern Ocean stretches from 40º to 60º South Latitude. The roaring 40s are warmer than the Furious Fifties, which are warmer than the Screaming Sixties. In the Antarctic Coastal Current along the continental shelf around 70º South Latitude, it freezes in the winter and is always around 25-32º in winter and about 35-40º in summer

By comparison for temperatures, the temperature off the coast of Southern California (at San Clemente) in July is 64º, and 59º at Point Mugu, a few miles north of Malibu, and 58º in San Francisco; the temperature in the Southern Ocean (South Pacific) for an equivalent summer month is 50º (David P. Schneider and F. David B., Reusch, “Antarctic and Southern Ocean Surface Temperatures in CMIP5 Models,” AMS100, 2015; The National Center for Atmospheric Research is sponsored by the National Science Foundation). The Southern Ocean is colder in the South Atlantic than in the Pacific.
• Reader: “All so Laman and Lemuel wouldn't defect on islands near the strait of Malacca or Borneo, New Guinea or the Philippines, etc. Brilliant.
Response: The Lord took Lehi and his party about 2,260 miles from Jerusalem, down the Red Sea, across the Empty Quarter, and down into Oman, the last 40% over a desert that even the Arabs tend to avoid. Whether this was because of Laman and Lemuel’s nature or not is unknown. It seems reasonable to assume, however, that where there is no opportunity to alter their condition or situation, Laman and Lemuel, and the sons of Ishmael, would have been less inclined to rebellious acts than when they felt they had an opportunity as he scriptural record well points out.
• Reader: “Well, guess what, it's 7,000 miles from Oman to Tasmania and 6,500 from Tasmania to Coquimbo = 13,500 approx miles. Use the measuring tool on Google Earth. From Oman to the Cape is roughly 4,500 miles and there to Florida 7,700 miles approx. = 12,200 approx.”
On a flat map, the distance looks much further for distance from (yellow line) Oman to the Southern Ocean and across to South America, than the distance from (red line) Oman around the
African cape and up to Florida; However, flat maps do not show the curvature of a globe and the far shorter distance around the globe in the Southern Ocean

Response: The mileage we stated in the previous responses are sea miles, not air miles, which we verified with google.
• Reader: “No need to sail through "Antarctica" frigid waters nor come in sight of an island as it's possible to do when sailing between Africa and Madagascar.”
Response: Lehi did not sail through the Mozambique Channel between Africa and Madagascar. They sailed with the current that sweeps out into the South Indian Ocean gyre, east of Kilmia, Samhah islands, and just east of Socotra islands, and further east of Seychelles, Coetivy, and Gingt Cinq islands, and far east of Mauritius and Réunion, and even east of Port Mathurin island—which, by the way, cuts down considerably on the distance covered to the Southern Ocean.
    The route of the current would be west of the Maldives, the Chagos Archipelago and the British Indian Ocean Territory, then east of the French Southern and Antarctic Lands, as well as Heard and McDonald islands, sailing west of Tasmania, and rounding the South Island of New Zealand to the south and curving into the Southern Ocean (ACC or West Wind Drift) around 50º south latitude and turning north with the current around 90º west longitude and toward the Chilean coast.
    This is the shortest and fastest route from Oman to the Western Hemisphere. It should also be noted that in the open sea, you do not have to be too far from an island, not to be able to see it due to the curvature of the earth.

3 comments:

  1. This is all very interesting trying to explain to these Heartland folks (I'm assuming Heartland) the conditions along the route to South America. What they fail to realize is the utter absurdity of their own model particularly when it comes to the Jaredites. I've been discussing this with some folks lately and I can't seem to convince them that the Jaredites did not and could not drift up the so-called St. Lawrence river or seaway at 2,200 bc because of the ice age. Have you ever discussed the ice age and what it means to the Heartland model vs the place where the Jaredites really landed in 2,200bc? They really landed near the equator in Ecuador which was the perfect place during the ice age.

    The Jaredites left from the tower around 2,200bc which occurred about 100 to 150 years after the flood. This is well within the time frame when the ice age would have been reaching it's maximum extent.

    The reason I bring this up is because I'm a creationist and have found in the creationist literature that the ice age lasted from 500 to 1000 years. If that is true (and it is) then the St. Lawrence river system would have been blocked by a continental glacier when the Jaredites sailed. Not only that, but the glacier would have covered part of North America at that time down through the state of New York. This I believe among other absurd claims of the Heartland folks totally destroys their model. The only problem is, to believe it you have to understand Noah's flood and when the ice age actually occurred. This is far different than believing that the waters sailing to South America were slightly chilly.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Another question I have about the Jaredites. Is it even possible for the Jaredite barges to have been blown around the Horn of Africa? I know the area is called the graveyard of ships. Isn't tacking required to make the trip around the southern most tip of Africa?

    ReplyDelete
  3. I believe in the scriptures. In my reading, the scriptures do not give a creation account of our physical earth. The creation account in Genesis 1 and Moses 2 and Abraham 4 are of the spiritual creation. Moses 3:5 (and Genesis 2:5 and Abraham 5:5) makes this very clear:

    "And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew. For I, the Lord God, created all things, of which I have spoken [in Moses 2], SPIRITUALLY, before they were naturally upon the face of the earth. For I, the Lord God, had not caused it to rain upon the face of the earth. And I, the Lord God, had created all the children of men; and not yet a man to till the ground; for in heaven created I them; and there was NOT YET FLESH UPON THE EARTH, NEITHER in the WATER, NEITHER in the AIR;"


    No flesh yet? Moses 2 (which parallels Genesis 1 and Abraham 3) mentions water and air creatures and mankind, male and female. How clear can it be? The Moses 2 and Genesis 1 and Abraham 3 accounts are spiritual accounts, not accounts of what happened on our physical earth.


    Now it is true that the physical creation parallels the spiritual creation. Possibly there was water above the firmament (sky) at one point in our physical creation. But that water is clearly gone now. Maybe it was part of the flood waters.


    Is it possible that God creates spirits for all living things for a family of his spirit children, and then sends them down for 7 thousand or more years -- then cleans up the physical earth, and then sends down another family of his spirits with another Adam? And over and over again. Well, maybe not. But maybe.

    We only have bits and pieces of the creation account of our physical earth. We cannot assume that it is identical to the spiritual creation account. The scriptures do not tell us the age of our physical earth and the universe we are in.


    ReplyDelete