Chaoswraith
New Member
If you're looking for evidence of the flood, read this article and scroll down to "Scientific Evidence".
http://www.icr.org/pubs/btg-a/btg-116a.htm
http://www.icr.org/pubs/btg-a/btg-116a.htm
What makes Christianity beleivable?
- Thread starter Gramtorn
- Start date
That's not evidence there was a flood, that's evidence that doesn't specifically disprove a flood. And oral tradition records are not generally regarded as scientific evidence.
Nothing there was news to me - and he never did answer the key questions of:
1. Where the hell did all the water go. Unless you can show that mountains have been getting bigger not smaller uniformly, then we can assume an Everest sized mountain. Raise the water table to cover it annnnnnd.... That's an awful, awful lot of water.
2. Why isn't all life dead. As discussed even fish and marine animals would have perished.
Nothing there was news to me - and he never did answer the key questions of:
1. Where the hell did all the water go. Unless you can show that mountains have been getting bigger not smaller uniformly, then we can assume an Everest sized mountain. Raise the water table to cover it annnnnnd.... That's an awful, awful lot of water.
2. Why isn't all life dead. As discussed even fish and marine animals would have perished.
Master~Plan
New Member
[b said:
Well it is speculation that all life would be dead. I don't think 40 days submerged is enough to kill all plant life, and if it did kill most plant life, there would still be seeds floating around that fall into the nice wet soil. What I"m saying too is specualtion, we just don't know what the earth was like back then. The ocean is salty because the rivers wash over the top of rocks and collect minerals, and deposit them into the ocean. Maybe since the earth was pretty new that the oceans weren't salty? like I said, it was only 40 days, so I think the fish could do without thier currents for that long, Maybe some couldn't and died, who knows.[b said:
sure, it is a lot of water. I don't think there is any way a flood of that magnitude could possibly naturally occur. Like I posted earlier, I believe if God can create the world, then he can move some water around.[b said:Quote[/b] ]1. Where the heck(edited) did all the water go.
CCGR
Member
I think they were afloat for about a year if I'm not mistaken the 40 days 40 nights is figurative for "a long time"
It's not so much the immersion - although over a months immersion in fresh water will kill most plants that I know of - it's more the immersion in SALINE water that is the point.
Go out and salt a few fields - you see what grows there! It would take centuries for the soil to be leached clean of salt by the rain.
Go out and salt a few fields - you see what grows there! It would take centuries for the soil to be leached clean of salt by the rain.
Master~Plan
New Member
^
[b said:
whys that?[b said:
I suppose it depends on whether you think the earth was new, and on what the hell you think the ocean sits on, of course...
In order for your theory to be true, rivers would need to get saltier and saltier the longer they ran and the siltier they were. The amazon is unashamedly fresh water - despite its size and impressive length.
In order for your theory to be true, rivers would need to get saltier and saltier the longer they ran and the siltier they were. The amazon is unashamedly fresh water - despite its size and impressive length.
Avesther
New Member
[b said:
The water came for that period of time. The ark floated for many months after that.
The waters flooded the earth of 150 days (Gen 7:24) And it was a couple weeks after, that Noah and his family left the ark.
The average depth of all the oceans and seas is deeper by many times, then the average above sea level height of land.
We read in Gen 7:11 that the water came forth from below and above. And water with such force that new mountain ranges would have been formed and old mountain ranges would have had millions of years worth of erosion forced upon them in days.
All formations that are said to have been formed by the movement of glaciers over 10's of thousands of years are also commonly left by a great force of water over a much shorter period of time. If enough water came from above and below to flood the entirety of the globe in 40 days and nights, then morraines, cirques and the U-shaped carvings in mountains would most definatly have been left behind.
Again, all evidences of an ice age are also evidences for a global flood. Just matters in what you believe...that science is right or God is right.
Well, seeing as how we have evidence that Mammoths were grazing on the floor of the North Sea during the Ice Age (see, if the water's all frozen then it freezes at the North first, and the average water level actually DROPS significantly) and I don't believe in aquatic Mammoth, then I guess I'm going to have to personally side with science on this one.
Until Christianity as a whole brings the bible back into step with what we're learning about the natural world then it's doomed to continue to be sidelined as it currently is. Whenever you put the improbable up in competition with the provable the outcome is certain.
Until Christianity as a whole brings the bible back into step with what we're learning about the natural world then it's doomed to continue to be sidelined as it currently is. Whenever you put the improbable up in competition with the provable the outcome is certain.
Until Christianity as a whole brings the bible back into step with what we're learning about the natural world then it's doomed to continue to be sidelined as it currently is. Whenever you put the improbable up in competition with the provable the outcome is certain.
Hmm, so your saying that we should accsept this the new great knowlagde that really proves nothing else than the desperate need for men to not accept God ?
Seriously when you look at "oh no not that clishe again" well f.eks. darwin he spent more time alive plotting holes in a doomed theorie than actually conforming anything...
and you cant just blow of aquatic mammuths just cuz none of yer fancy magazines wrote about them. But seriously, I'n studies of "ye old world" it would look as if it was one big continent and no northpole and south pole, "teori" what if the flood split the continents and then God *hokus pokusly* created the pole's for a greater good... I'm raving cuz I'm a bit tired but my point is in there. Point: Humainty stray to hard to prove God inexistant and rely on science that really can prove nothing else, we have a book who is yey old -> | | and it says there was a flood, you have instruments from now, who can not fully agree wether there was a flood or not...
Avesther
New Member
It would also make sense to have Mammoth grazing at the bottom of the North sea before the flood as well. My hypothesis is as valid as a "No God" science hypothesis.[b said:
And the bible will not be changed to come in line with a science that basis its hypothesis, analysis and conclusions on the axiom that there is no God. That is foolish.
How is the ice age provable, when all the evidence that supports it also supports a global flood? (and for the record, vice versa.) Not one person alive today can attest as first hand witnesses to either incident. All that we are left with is evidence of something happening.
If you believe in the God of the bible, then the flood explains it. If you reject the God of the bible, you have to find some other explaination.
Most of todays science does not seek to prove or disprove the God of the bible. It makes the assertion that there is no God, and seeks to explain what is observed in the observable realm without reference to God. Science is hardly objective seeing as it has thrown out an entire realm of possibilities before the pen hits the paper to write out a hypothesis.
Grand Master
New Member
The flood story does not account for evidence of abrasion of rock by glaciers advancing and retreating. As for the link talking about fossils found high up in the mountains - there is no problem there. Mountains ranges were not always mountains. The rock forming the Rocky mountains was at one time part of the ocean floor; through plate tectonics the rock has been pushed up to form mountain ranges.
Avesther
New Member
[b said:
I think it does just fine. As the water tore through mountain ranges (whether formed during creation or formed because of the flood), massive amounts of rock fragments were ripped away from the mountain faces. The rock fragments act as abrasives in the water and as they pass other mountain faces, they would leave scaring on the cliffs.
What about Terminal Morraine? That would suggest that the flood waters ceased before they achieved total coverage, wouldn't it? What about cirque's that show where the glaciers that dominated Northern Europe and Asia actually started?
If there was a global flood then this would be an E.L.E there would be NO life alive on the planet ANYWHERE. Although there have been several near E.L.E's there has been absolutely no proof that all life came to a crashing halt during a one month period. None.
Your explanation of why Mammoths used to graze where the North Sea now is suggests that a whole bunch of NEW water was magically created. This is not an observable phenomenon. If you guys are just going to make stuff up without reference to the recorded and understood natural cycles and laws then there will never be an understanding reached - except the agreement to disagree.
Science presents believable theories backed by observable facts and it tests and retests its assumptions. The bible comes pre-loaded with fantastic hyperbole based on a scientifically illiterate understanding of how the world (or a very small part of it) works. Now - you tell me you have faith that God fills in the gaps by magic, and I'm prepared to accept that you believe that, but please don't pretend that available facts fit your preconceptions. They don't. They won't.
If there was a global flood then this would be an E.L.E there would be NO life alive on the planet ANYWHERE. Although there have been several near E.L.E's there has been absolutely no proof that all life came to a crashing halt during a one month period. None.
Your explanation of why Mammoths used to graze where the North Sea now is suggests that a whole bunch of NEW water was magically created. This is not an observable phenomenon. If you guys are just going to make stuff up without reference to the recorded and understood natural cycles and laws then there will never be an understanding reached - except the agreement to disagree.
Science presents believable theories backed by observable facts and it tests and retests its assumptions. The bible comes pre-loaded with fantastic hyperbole based on a scientifically illiterate understanding of how the world (or a very small part of it) works. Now - you tell me you have faith that God fills in the gaps by magic, and I'm prepared to accept that you believe that, but please don't pretend that available facts fit your preconceptions. They don't. They won't.
Well its belived there was and hmm I can't explain it cuz I'm not good enough in yer lill laungage, but Ibelive to have read somewhere there was an circle of water, or very heavy water filled air, like 80% water in the air, not so far under the atmosphere\stratoshere? one of the, and that was what collapsed during the flood, there is no mentioning of the dinosaurs beeing extinct in the bible so the teori was that they could not survive with this new air thing that was crated because of the lack of water circle in the sky... Please try to make sense of this.. :\
Sounds like some form of groundwater to me. Fountains of the deep...[b said:
Sounds like nothing was SUPPOSED to live through it, to me.[b said:
That is a lie. Darwin never originated Evolution. That's NeoDarwinism. Darwin thought small changes as a result to changes in the environtment were possible, Natural Selection. In a forest of white trees, white moths will be the dominant species, since any other color will stand out and be eaten. But if a large factory comes along and pollutes the area to the poin where the trees are black, black moths will now be the dominant species. Natural selection within a genepool.[b said:
~Miriax
Okay, so nothing was supposed to live through the flood, so there's no problem with that issue then.
Now tell me how you can fit two of everything into one boat without accepting speciesation? Was there a series of enormous aviaries? How did Noah build vivariums and keep them heated for the lizards? Just how did he collect animals from the four corners of the earth in the time that he had available?
Never mind the other problems with physical evidence that still haven't been answered!
Now, onto other issues - do you seriously expect me to believe that there are huge amounts of water kept out of the circulation system because they're trapped underground?
Now tell me how you can fit two of everything into one boat without accepting speciesation? Was there a series of enormous aviaries? How did Noah build vivariums and keep them heated for the lizards? Just how did he collect animals from the four corners of the earth in the time that he had available?
Never mind the other problems with physical evidence that still haven't been answered!
Now, onto other issues - do you seriously expect me to believe that there are huge amounts of water kept out of the circulation system because they're trapped underground?
Well of all the unbeliveble things about the story, I wouldn't figure that to be the hardest part to accsept (water locked under earth)
How he collected them, dunno, in the cartoon he blows a horn and they all come, or maybe the creatures figured "hey if we don't find a gigant boad well die..."
how the lizards survived mayhap, he let them sleep really low one day and really high the other day,
Btw. can anyone make the description of the arc into meters and cm ?
How he collected them, dunno, in the cartoon he blows a horn and they all come, or maybe the creatures figured "hey if we don't find a gigant boad well die..."
how the lizards survived mayhap, he let them sleep really low one day and really high the other day,
Btw. can anyone make the description of the arc into meters and cm ?
CCGR
Member
The Ark measured 300x50x30 cubits (Genesis 6:15) which is about 140x23x13.5 metres or 459x75x44 feet, so its volume was 43,500 m3 (cubic metres) or 1.54 million cubic feet. To put this in perspective, this is the equivalent volume of 522 standard American railroad stock cars, each of which can hold 240 sheep.
http://www.answersingenesis.org/home....ark.asp
http://www.answersingenesis.org/home....ark.asp
I would just love to know how many aquaria he needed for just the fish species. Everyone assumes the biggest hassle would be the large mammals - in fact they'd not be too difficult - after all, assuming that the animals we have NOW survived the flood and none that are recently extinct, you'd only need four elephants. Compare that to the millions of insects you'd need. And the birds! And the fish! Doesn't bear thinking about really, does it?