-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
40% of Americans belive the world was created 6000-years ago
- Thread starter jimdene
- Start date
LittleNipper
Well-Known Member
You must perceive all "christians" as the nastiest, dumbest, creeps in the world. So there is obviously no evidence that they are different then anyone else...
I've heard nothing but about evolution all my life. Creation is a breath of fresh air for me.
LittleNipper
Well-Known Member
Into the oceans basins, that were newly formed more deeply. As mountains rose, the oceans sank.
tumbleweed41
Resident Liberal Hippie
Many find comfort in the supernatural when reality is beyond their understanding.
I blame the schools...
tumbleweed41
Resident Liberal Hippie
New ocean basins. Most flood models deal with the water after the flood by proposing that it became our present oceans. The earth's terrain, according to this model, was much, much flatter during the Flood, and through cataclysms, the mountains were pushed up and the ocean basins lowered. (Brown proposes that the cataclysms were caused by the crust sliding around on a cushion of water; Whitcomb & Morris don't give a cause.)
- How could such a change be effected? To change the density and/or temperature of at least a quarter of the earth's crust fast enough to raise and lower the ocean floor in a matter of months would require mechanisms beyond any proposed in any of the flood models.
- Why are most sediments on high ground? Most sediments are carried until the water slows down or stops. If the water stopped in the oceans, we should expect more sediments there. Baumgardner's own modeling shows that, during the Flood, currents would be faster over continents than over ocean basins [Baumgardner, 1994], so sediments should, on the whole, be removed from continents and deposited in ocean basins. Yet sediments on the ocean basin average 0.6 km thick, while on continents (including continental shelves), they average 2.6 km thick. [Poldervaart, 1955]
- Where's the evidence? The water draining from the continents would have produced tremendous torrents. There is evidence of similar flooding in the Scablands of Washington state (from the draining of a lake after the breaking of an ice dam) and on the far western floor of the Mediterranean Sea (from the ocean breaking through the Straits of Gibralter). Why is such evidence not found worldwide?
- How did the ark survive the process? Such a wholesale restructuring of the earth's topography, compressed into just a few months, would have produced tsunamis large enough to circle the earth. The aftershocks alone would have been devastating for years afterwards.
Tiapan
Grumpy Old Man
40% of Americans belive the world was created 6000-years ago
Guess it makes Americans just as gullible as Muslims
In respect of previous post,. a 3rd grade child could prove mathematically that the planetoid volume of water involved exceeds all the oceans contents several hundred times, indicating it's falsehood.
No other argument needed.
Cheers
Guess it makes Americans just as gullible as Muslims
In respect of previous post,. a 3rd grade child could prove mathematically that the planetoid volume of water involved exceeds all the oceans contents several hundred times, indicating it's falsehood.
No other argument needed.
Cheers
Last edited:
LittleNipper
Well-Known Member
The public schools threw out the divine and education went with it. Kids are not allowed to consider. They are now taught to copy.
Jose Fly
Fisker of men
The National Science Foundation conducts an annual science literacy poll. The last one I saw showed that 20% of Americans said the sun revolves around the earth. How much of that is due to simply not knowing versus some other reason (e.g. being a committed geocentrist) is not known.
JustWondering2
Just the facts Ma'am
I bet LittleNipper thought the Flintstones was a documentary!! LOL Still believe in Santa, oh and the Easter Bunny is coming soon too! Oh Boy!
LittleNipper
Well-Known Member
You say that, but you made it up. The fact is, that the ocean is seven miles deep in spots. Now, GOD would not logically create a perfect planet that would be dangerous to wander across. So, my logical guess (to the best of my human reasoning ,which is likely flawed but doesn't go against anything the Bible says, as far as I see) is that there were gentle slopes and some very beautiful hills, but no mountains as we now have.
I also believe that there was likely a very small ocean that was not extreemly deep, but deep enough to make whales happy and again, the shore was likely very gentle and not an abrupt drop.
The reality of underground water is expressed in Genesis 2:4-6 and Genesis 7:11.
A third grade child may just come to a different conclusion, but only if one is willing to allow that child some freedom to wonder.
PS> Muslims seem to believe in salvation through their own works...
Last edited:
LittleNipper
Well-Known Member
Nope, though Saint Nicholas had something to do with the secular origins of Santa Claus.
Jose Fly
Fisker of men
LittleNipper,
Do you have any idea how much energy it takes just to move something the size of Mt. Everest 1 km? It's something in the order of 300-500 times the energy in the Hiroshima bomb. Now times that by all the mountains in the world and compress it into the time frame your scenario requires and you end up basically destroying the entire planet (e.g. melting the earth's crust, boiling off the oceans, destroying the atmosphere).
Why not just say "God did it all" and be done with it? All you're doing here is making yourself, and by extension your beliefs, look extremely foolish.
Do you have any idea how much energy it takes just to move something the size of Mt. Everest 1 km? It's something in the order of 300-500 times the energy in the Hiroshima bomb. Now times that by all the mountains in the world and compress it into the time frame your scenario requires and you end up basically destroying the entire planet (e.g. melting the earth's crust, boiling off the oceans, destroying the atmosphere).
Why not just say "God did it all" and be done with it? All you're doing here is making yourself, and by extension your beliefs, look extremely foolish.
JustWondering2
Just the facts Ma'am
As others have asked you in the past, where is the evidence (other than the Bible) that you base this on? You have none.
I don't even think that of you. I know many Christians; most of them are kind and intelligent.
I'm not sure how this bit follows from my last post.So there is obviously no evidence that they are different then anyone else...
But you do realize that it's a "breath of fresh air" that's completely unsupported by (and in some aspects soundly refuted by) science, don't you? If you're going to accept "religious truth" over scientific fact, I can't stop you, but in that case I really don't see why you'd be participating in these sorts of debates. I mean, if you've decided that your mind will never, ever be changed regardless of the evidence, then what's the point?
AxisMundi
E Pluribus Unum!!!
If you don't like living in a secular Constitutional Republic, there are a few theocracies left in the Middle East for you to move to.
Alceste
Vagabond
I'm afraid you're wrong. Even with the dramatic (and unexplained) reorganization of the world's landscape you suggest occurred after the flood, there is still not enough water in the world to cover the land mass we observe. That's right, even if you smoothed off the mountains, it couldn't be done.
You yourself can investigate this. Get a deep lasagna tray, put in about 3/4ths water and 1/4th rocks and non-soluble dirt and such, piled into forms resembling earth's continents, ensuring that the solids are visible above the water level. Assuming fixed parameters for the coastal regions, you can now change the land masses to reflect any shape you desire. As long as each "continent" remains in the basic shape you started with, you will find that you will always have about the same volume of earth above sea level. This is because as you subtract earth from the "coastal" regions so they can be inundated, you must plop it back onto the continent somewhere else.
It's really obvious. And I mean REALLY obvious. Seriously. A little kid could figure that out. If I were you I would be extremely embarrassed to insist such a flood could occur.
The only thing God could have done to cover the whole earth with water simultaneously is flatten it completely (ie, change the shape of each continent) - tamp it down as flat and uniform as a tabletop so the water would lie on top.
But then, if he did that, why would he need the "deluge"?
What you suggest does go against what the Bible says.
The flood account mentions "high mountains" existing before the flood. Have a look at Genesis 7:
Also, after the flood, the Bible says that the Ark came to rest on Mount Ararat... i.e. the mountain already had a name. This implies that it was known to people before the flood.
LittleNipper
Well-Known Member
And I'm reminded that ANYTHING is possible with GOD ------ even living things. You seem to be trying very hard to dissuade this idiot. Perhaps I'm hitting a nerve?