-
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!
Creationists: what prevents you from accepting ToE?
- Thread starter Debater Slayer
- Start date
painted wolf
Grey Muzzle
averageJOE
zombie
The sheer weight of the "flood waters" were able to do all this...but some how still not strong enough to rip apart a wooden box held together with tar???
Come on Pegg, deep down you don't really believe this either.
Last edited:
Pegg
Jehovah our God is One
The water that exerted enough pressure to separate the continental plates. Maybe you don't understand the science of tsunami's either? A slight shift in the tectonic plates recently devastated parts of Japan and in another situation Sri Lanka and Indonesia. This boat built by a grape grower would have done well against those forces.........................not. But never ever ever ever, let your "god given" intelligence allow it's ugly head up.the boat was on top of the water,
Oh and enough pressure to separate the continental plates, but not enough pressure to pulverise any plant on the planet. Very fortunate that an olive tree was growing on Everest, hey?
Last edited:
painted wolf
Grey Muzzle
Not to mention the supersonic speeds that the continents would have to travel to reach their present locations.
Pegg, I asked this earlier... Why not just go all the way with the miracles and say that the first two wolves gave birth to a thousand puppies of every breed/species in their first litter?
Surely this is as believable as having a new species suddenly evolve every couple of generations.
wa:do
Pegg, I asked this earlier... Why not just go all the way with the miracles and say that the first two wolves gave birth to a thousand puppies of every breed/species in their first litter?
Surely this is as believable as having a new species suddenly evolve every couple of generations.
wa:do
shawn001
Well-Known Member
"
Originally Posted by Pegg
Yes i agree with the idea that the earth may still have been one piece of land at that time.... that would explain how all the animals could have come to the ark. And with the sheer weight of the great flood waters, a lot of movement of the crust would have occurred...the weight of the water itself causing great depressions in the oceans and breaking apart the lands. And there is the evidence of low lying river beds which extend out far into the oceans, so there was far less water on earth before the flood then there is now."
"earth may still have been one piece of land at that time"
The Continents come together every four hundred million years.
"The key principle of plate tectonics is that the lithosphere exists as separate and distinct tectonic plates, which float on the fluid-like (visco-elastic solid) asthenosphere. The relative fluidity of the asthenosphere allows the tectonic plates to undergo motion in different directions. This map shows 15 of the largest plates. Note that the Indo-Australian Plate may be breaking apart into the Indian and Australian plates, which are shown separately on this map."
Filelates tect2 en.svg - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The continents have come together more then once.
Why isn't Rodinia called Pangaea any more?
Rodinia and Pangea were two different supercontinents, rather than two different names for the same supercontinent. They were both formed from some of the same continental fragments, but they formed at different periods in time. The information below was obtained from Dr. Christopher Scotese's excellent website on plate motions, called "The Paleomap Project". Dr. Scotese is one of the world's leading researchers on paleogeopgraphy (the study of the ancient positions of different land masses and their characteristics). Go to the web site at :
Rodinia was a supercontinent formed about 1100 million years ago (that's 1,100,000,000 years). 750 million years ago, Rodinia broke into three pieces that drifted apart as a new ocean formed between the pieces. Then, about 600 million years ago, those pieces came back together with a big crunch known as the Pan-African orogeny (mountain building event). This formed a new supercontinent, with the name of Pannotia. By about 550 million years ago, Pannotia was breaking up into several small fragments, Laurentia (the core of what is now North America), Baltica (northern Europe), and Siberia, among others, and one very large piece. This large piece, containing what would become China, India, Africa, South America, and Antarctica, was called Gondwana. It is considered a supercontinent in its own right because it is so big, but it is only part of the earlier supercontinents. Over the next 200 million years many of the small pieces came together to form another large continent called Laurasia. Laurasia and Gondwana joined approximately 275 million years ago to form the supercontinent of Pangea. The breakup of Pangea is still going on today and contributes in the formation of the Atlantic Ocean. Eventually a new supercontinent will form and then it will break apart and so on.
Re: Why isn't Rodinia called Pangaea any more?
" that would explain how all the animals could have come to the ark. "
USGS
"
Did all the dinosaurs live together, and at the same time?
Dinosaur communities were separated by both time and geography. The "age of dinosaurs" (the Mesozoic Era) included three consecutive geologic time periods (the Triassic, Jurassic, and Cretaceous Periods). Different dinosaur species lived during each of these three periods. For example, the Jurassic dinosaur Stegosaurus already had been extinct for approximately 80 million years before the appearance of the Cretaceous dinosaur Tyrannosaurus. In fact, the time separating Stegosaurus and Tyrannosaurus is greater than the time separating Tyrannosaurus and you. At the beginning of dinosaur history (the Triassic Period), there was one supercontinent on Earth (Pangea). Many dinosaur types were widespread across it. However, as Pangea broke apart, dinosaurs became scattered across the globe on separate continents, and new types of dinosaurs evolved separately in each geographic area. "
Did All the Dinosaurs Live Together, and At the Same Time?
Man was not around at the time of the dinosaurs.
"And with the sheer weight of the great flood waters, a lot of movement of the crust would have occurred...the weight of the water itself causing great depressions in the oceans and breaking apart the lands."
Not what happened. We know what drives plate tectonics, the heat of the earth moves the plates. We know for sure there was no global flood.
"evidence of low lying river beds which extend out far into the oceans"
Due to river currents and the fresh water entering the oceans.
" so there was far less water on earth before the flood then there is now."
Not ture.
From Pangaea to the Modern Continents
[youtube]WaUk94AdXPA[/youtube]
From Pangaea to the Modern Continents - YouTube
Earth's Future super pangea
[youtube]tv6p48v0meE[/youtube]
Earth's Future - YouTube
Originally Posted by Pegg
Yes i agree with the idea that the earth may still have been one piece of land at that time.... that would explain how all the animals could have come to the ark. And with the sheer weight of the great flood waters, a lot of movement of the crust would have occurred...the weight of the water itself causing great depressions in the oceans and breaking apart the lands. And there is the evidence of low lying river beds which extend out far into the oceans, so there was far less water on earth before the flood then there is now."
"earth may still have been one piece of land at that time"
The Continents come together every four hundred million years.
"The key principle of plate tectonics is that the lithosphere exists as separate and distinct tectonic plates, which float on the fluid-like (visco-elastic solid) asthenosphere. The relative fluidity of the asthenosphere allows the tectonic plates to undergo motion in different directions. This map shows 15 of the largest plates. Note that the Indo-Australian Plate may be breaking apart into the Indian and Australian plates, which are shown separately on this map."
File
lates tect2 en.svg - Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaThe continents have come together more then once.
Why isn't Rodinia called Pangaea any more?
Rodinia and Pangea were two different supercontinents, rather than two different names for the same supercontinent. They were both formed from some of the same continental fragments, but they formed at different periods in time. The information below was obtained from Dr. Christopher Scotese's excellent website on plate motions, called "The Paleomap Project". Dr. Scotese is one of the world's leading researchers on paleogeopgraphy (the study of the ancient positions of different land masses and their characteristics). Go to the web site at :
Rodinia was a supercontinent formed about 1100 million years ago (that's 1,100,000,000 years). 750 million years ago, Rodinia broke into three pieces that drifted apart as a new ocean formed between the pieces. Then, about 600 million years ago, those pieces came back together with a big crunch known as the Pan-African orogeny (mountain building event). This formed a new supercontinent, with the name of Pannotia. By about 550 million years ago, Pannotia was breaking up into several small fragments, Laurentia (the core of what is now North America), Baltica (northern Europe), and Siberia, among others, and one very large piece. This large piece, containing what would become China, India, Africa, South America, and Antarctica, was called Gondwana. It is considered a supercontinent in its own right because it is so big, but it is only part of the earlier supercontinents. Over the next 200 million years many of the small pieces came together to form another large continent called Laurasia. Laurasia and Gondwana joined approximately 275 million years ago to form the supercontinent of Pangea. The breakup of Pangea is still going on today and contributes in the formation of the Atlantic Ocean. Eventually a new supercontinent will form and then it will break apart and so on.
Re: Why isn't Rodinia called Pangaea any more?
" that would explain how all the animals could have come to the ark. "
USGS
"
Did all the dinosaurs live together, and at the same time?
Dinosaur communities were separated by both time and geography. The "age of dinosaurs" (the Mesozoic Era) included three consecutive geologic time periods (the Triassic, Jurassic, and Cretaceous Periods). Different dinosaur species lived during each of these three periods. For example, the Jurassic dinosaur Stegosaurus already had been extinct for approximately 80 million years before the appearance of the Cretaceous dinosaur Tyrannosaurus. In fact, the time separating Stegosaurus and Tyrannosaurus is greater than the time separating Tyrannosaurus and you. At the beginning of dinosaur history (the Triassic Period), there was one supercontinent on Earth (Pangea). Many dinosaur types were widespread across it. However, as Pangea broke apart, dinosaurs became scattered across the globe on separate continents, and new types of dinosaurs evolved separately in each geographic area. "
Did All the Dinosaurs Live Together, and At the Same Time?
Man was not around at the time of the dinosaurs.
"And with the sheer weight of the great flood waters, a lot of movement of the crust would have occurred...the weight of the water itself causing great depressions in the oceans and breaking apart the lands."
Not what happened. We know what drives plate tectonics, the heat of the earth moves the plates. We know for sure there was no global flood.
"evidence of low lying river beds which extend out far into the oceans"
Due to river currents and the fresh water entering the oceans.
" so there was far less water on earth before the flood then there is now."
Not ture.
From Pangaea to the Modern Continents
[youtube]WaUk94AdXPA[/youtube]
From Pangaea to the Modern Continents - YouTube
Earth's Future super pangea
[youtube]tv6p48v0meE[/youtube]
Earth's Future - YouTube
shawn001
Well-Known Member
I watch MT Saint Helen's erupt, the biggest thing I have ever seen. It looked like they dropped the bomb. Actually it was 4 times bigger then Hiroshima or something like that.
It was cause by plate tectonics.
How The Earth Was Made.Mt St Helens.
A look at the creation of the Mount St. Helens volcano in Washington state; its history of violent eruptions and the evidence another massive eruption could occur again in the near future.
[youtube]M4PsTPEaeRI[/youtube]
How The Earth Was Made.Mt St Helens. - YouTube
It was cause by plate tectonics.
How The Earth Was Made.Mt St Helens.
A look at the creation of the Mount St. Helens volcano in Washington state; its history of violent eruptions and the evidence another massive eruption could occur again in the near future.
[youtube]M4PsTPEaeRI[/youtube]
How The Earth Was Made.Mt St Helens. - YouTube
Pegg
Jehovah our God is One
Pegg, I asked this earlier... Why not just go all the way with the miracles and say that the first two wolves gave birth to a thousand puppies of every breed/species in their first litter?
Surely this is as believable as having a new species suddenly evolve every couple of generations.
wa:do
well i guess i dont believe that it was necessary for the same reason that through one man, all colors, shapes and sizes of mankind exist. we've seen how inbreeding creates traits, we've seen how cross breeding creates traits too. And in one litter of pups, there can be long and short haired dogs....there can also be dogs of different colors. over thousands of years we should expect a great variety to exist if it is that the genes can provide variety. And that is really what i beleive about 'kinds' ...i believe that variety is possible through genetics. Just as we see in mankind.
darkendless
Guardian of Asgaard
the boat was on top of the water,
It wasn't always. Think about how much damage would have been done to the boat when it first started to float but water had not yet covered rocks and hills etc.
Not very practical at all.
camanintx
Well-Known Member
Why can't Evolution be the method through which God created all of the various "kinds"?
Only if you mix different breeds can breeders develop and new breed in a matter of a few years. Keep breeding German Shepards with German Shepards and all you have are German Shepards. That's how you get throughbreds.
Except the variety in genetics is far too slow to explain the variety we see today. If the rate of mutation was large enough to account for all of the species we see today coming from just what was on Noah's ark, we should see new species appearing all of the time, but we don't. Only gradual changes over a very long period of time correspond with the rates of mutation we measure today.
painted wolf
Grey Muzzle
You believe that variety is possible through genetics... but that same genetics shows that we are all varieties of the same body of living organisms.
You are willing to grant that dozens to thousands (possibly even millions) of species can appear in a couple of thousand years, but that millions of years can't do the same thing... I find this contradiction very interesting.
wa:do
shawn001
Well-Known Member
Pegg, you seem intereted in these topic to begin with yes? Might not change your beliefs although the actual evidence should change your view on evolution.
Do you know what Mitochondrial DNA is?
'Mitochondrial Eve': Mother of All Humans Lived 200,000 Years Ago
'Mitochondrial Eve': Mother of all humans lived 200,000 years ago
Don't confuse this with Eve from the bible. She was not the first women or did she live just with one male.
"In the field of human genetics, Mitochondrial Eve refers to the matrilineal most recent common ancestor (MRCA) of modern humans. In other words, she was the woman from whom all living humans today descend, on their mother's side, and through the mothers of those mothers and so on, back until all lines converge on one person."
Not the only woman
One of the misconceptions of mitochondrial Eve is that since all women alive today descended in a direct unbroken female line from her that she was the only woman alive at the time.[10][11] Nuclear DNA studies indicate that the size of the ancient human population never dropped below tens of thousands. Other women alive at Eve's time have descendants alive today, but sometime in the past, each of their lines of descent included at least one male, thereby breaking the mitochondrial DNA lines of descent. By contrast, Eve's lines of descent to each person alive today includes precisely one purely matrilineal line.[10]
Not a contemporary of "Adam"
Sometimes mitochondrial Eve is assumed to have lived at the same time as Y-chromosomal Adam, perhaps even meeting and mating with him. Like mitochondrial "Eve", Y-chromosomal "Adam" probably lived in Africa; however, this "Eve" lived much earlier than this "Adam" perhaps some 50,000 to 80,000 years earlier.[12]
Mitochondrial Eve - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Y-chromosomal Adam
Y-chromosomal Adam - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Do you know what Mitochondrial DNA is?
'Mitochondrial Eve': Mother of All Humans Lived 200,000 Years Ago
'Mitochondrial Eve': Mother of all humans lived 200,000 years ago
Don't confuse this with Eve from the bible. She was not the first women or did she live just with one male.
"In the field of human genetics, Mitochondrial Eve refers to the matrilineal most recent common ancestor (MRCA) of modern humans. In other words, she was the woman from whom all living humans today descend, on their mother's side, and through the mothers of those mothers and so on, back until all lines converge on one person."
Not the only woman
One of the misconceptions of mitochondrial Eve is that since all women alive today descended in a direct unbroken female line from her that she was the only woman alive at the time.[10][11] Nuclear DNA studies indicate that the size of the ancient human population never dropped below tens of thousands. Other women alive at Eve's time have descendants alive today, but sometime in the past, each of their lines of descent included at least one male, thereby breaking the mitochondrial DNA lines of descent. By contrast, Eve's lines of descent to each person alive today includes precisely one purely matrilineal line.[10]
Not a contemporary of "Adam"
Sometimes mitochondrial Eve is assumed to have lived at the same time as Y-chromosomal Adam, perhaps even meeting and mating with him. Like mitochondrial "Eve", Y-chromosomal "Adam" probably lived in Africa; however, this "Eve" lived much earlier than this "Adam" perhaps some 50,000 to 80,000 years earlier.[12]
Mitochondrial Eve - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Y-chromosomal Adam
Y-chromosomal Adam - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Zoe Doidge
Basically a Goddess
It always surprises me that people actually believe in the story of Noah's Ark as a literal account, because the idea is simply crazy.
In order to flood the world covering all the mountains you'd need roughly 3.27 times the amount of water currently in the world. Water finds it's own level, so how the land is distributed is irrelevant.
Imagine a water filled cube 1KM long, high and wide. You would need to add (at least) 4,529,392,542 of the things to our oceans as they exist now in order to flood Mount Everest. If there was less water back then, you'd need even more.
Even the most generous calculations taking into account the growth rate of mountains don't make a significant dent in the amount required.
Also there are various other problems, for example that amount of water would saturate the atmosphere and make it impossible to breathe air. The pressure exerted on the land would have created an obvious, fairly uniform imprint in the geologic record across the world, which doesn't exist.
That's to say nothing of the logistics of 8 people taking care of enough animals to repopulate the world with all the varieties we see today over only thousands of years.
In order to flood the world covering all the mountains you'd need roughly 3.27 times the amount of water currently in the world. Water finds it's own level, so how the land is distributed is irrelevant.
Imagine a water filled cube 1KM long, high and wide. You would need to add (at least) 4,529,392,542 of the things to our oceans as they exist now in order to flood Mount Everest. If there was less water back then, you'd need even more.
Even the most generous calculations taking into account the growth rate of mountains don't make a significant dent in the amount required.
Also there are various other problems, for example that amount of water would saturate the atmosphere and make it impossible to breathe air. The pressure exerted on the land would have created an obvious, fairly uniform imprint in the geologic record across the world, which doesn't exist.
That's to say nothing of the logistics of 8 people taking care of enough animals to repopulate the world with all the varieties we see today over only thousands of years.
johnhanks
Well-Known Member
I agree, but sadly the capacity of people to believe crazy things shows no sign of diminishing.
Yes, but flood believers also believe in an omnipotent god who could will any amount of water into or out of existence with the snap of a metaphorical finger.
As before, believers will just fall back on their failsafe getout clause that god took care of it all.
For me, the real killer of the flood myth as literal history lies not in its practical drawbacks (which an omnipotent deity could easily overcome) but in the sheer implausibility of such a deity, which after all is supposed to be capable of willing an entire universe into existence, having to fall back on something so clumsy and earthbound as a flood to eliminate those of its creatures it no longer wanted. (Not to mention a creaky wooden ship to save the ones it did.)
painted wolf
Grey Muzzle
I have no problem with people believing in the flood story based on faith, that is the whole point of faith... it's when they try to insist that there is physical, scientific evidence to justify trying to impose it on everyone else, that I get a bit boggled.
Either it is a matter of faith and a miracle... or it's a natural phenomenon and testable. It can't be both, because if you have physical evidence you don't need faith. If it was physically possible naturally then it doesn't need god.
wa:do
shawn001
Well-Known Member
Crystal caves Mexico
Fortress of Solitude-like Cave Houses Ridiculously Slow-Growing Crystals
Researcher uses a custom-built, ultrasensitive microscope to 
determine that a sample grew 0.000000000014 millimeter per secondthe equivalent of a pencil width every 16,000 years.
Fortress of Solitude-like Cave Houses Ridiculously Slow-Growing Crystals | Earth Science | DISCOVER Magazine
Fortress of Solitude-like Cave Houses Ridiculously Slow-Growing Crystals
Researcher uses a custom-built, ultrasensitive microscope to 
determine that a sample grew 0.000000000014 millimeter per secondthe equivalent of a pencil width every 16,000 years.
Fortress of Solitude-like Cave Houses Ridiculously Slow-Growing Crystals | Earth Science | DISCOVER Magazine
Dirty Penguin
Master Of Ceremony
Or it was simply a camp fire story passed down from generation to generations (Sumerians -Epic of Gilgamesh) then at some point the names and a few details were changed as the story evolved......
...Either way it goes you're right. The story has no basis in reality.Evidence indicate that most areas have experienced quite a few different floods in the past. To the ancients it seemed as if the waters covered everything round them. For people who have never left the valley or delta or whatever they lived in, it must have seemed like the whole world was under water. They pass it down from generation to generation. So, in the end, lots of cultures have flood stories. (An interesting one is that the indigenous peoples of Southern Africa don't have these stories (The Khoi, San, Bushman, etc.). Somehow these floods were not recorded in their past). From the geological evidence, it is clear that lots of floods, big and small, actually happened in the area at various times. Even tsunamis!Or it was simply a camp fire story passed down from generation to generations (Sumerians -Epic of Gilgamesh) then at some point the names and a few details were changed as the story evolved......
Yeah, I know. Empirical, verifiable evidence trump stories every time.
Last edited: