• 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!

Evidence of NOAH's FLOOD

shunyadragon

shunyadragon
Premium Member
Thank you for recognizing the earth WAS covered entirely by water a long, long, long time ago, so scientists say. Same as Mars had lots of water, they say. It relates to the water in and around the EARTH, not speaking of water at Mars, but using that as a figure to see that scientists say it DID have water in the past. I am NOT speaking of the flood spoken of in Genesis, just the fact that scientists say the earth was completely overcome by water, no land a long time ago. There is still lots and lots of water on the Earth, without which life could not exist here, so scientists say. :)
Please respond to the fact that the Earth was very different over 3 billion years ago and why this is impossible today. Your selective dishonest use of scientific references is unethical.
 
Last edited:

shunyadragon

shunyadragon
Premium Member
You are describing your own trolling as you do with denials and ridiculous claims. In a way I feel sorry for you. By the way, I don't read everything here -- have you realized you made a false claim when you said lava doesn't carry or deposit sediment??
Lava does not carry or deposit sediment. This fact was clearly described in detail in previous posts.

Lava is molten magma ejected to the surface when it hardens it is dark brown to black fine textured rock called basalt. Weathering over many years usually tens of thousands of years results in sediment..
 
Last edited:

YoursTrue

Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
Please respond to the fact that the Earth was very different over 3 billion years ago and why this is impossible today. Your selective dishonest use of scientific references is unethical.
Here is my response to you now, including your false assessment that lava does not carry sediment.
"no one fully knows the Son except the Father; neither does anyone fully know the Father except the Son and anyone to whom the Son is willing to reveal him."
I have somewhat enjoyed speaking with you and others here, and have found on some issues you are wrong. Take care.
 

shunyadragon

shunyadragon
Premium Member
Here is my response to you now, including your false assessment that lava does not carry sediment.
"no one fully knows the Son except the Father; neither does anyone fully know the Father except the Son and anyone to whom the Son is willing to reveal him."
I have somewhat enjoyed speaking with you and others here, and have found on some issues you are wrong. Take care.
I will take this is a failure to respond to the facts of the nature of our Earth. In the future do not misuse scientific references to support your agenda. I will call you to task with science if you misuse science..
 

YoursTrue

Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
Lava does not carry or deposit sediment. This fact was clearly described in detail in previous posts.

Lava is molten magma ejected to the surface when it hardens it is dark brown to black fine textured rock called basalt. Weathering over many years usually tens of thousands of years results in sediment..
Unfortunately you have it wrong. Sedimentary volcanism is described in the Dictionary of Geology & Mineralogy as the expelling, extruding or breaking through of overlying formations by a mixture of sediment, water, and gas driven by the gas under pressure.
 

Hockeycowboy

Witness for Jehovah
Premium Member
Remember this is a geologic ages involving millions of years billions of years ago, which you do not accept
Wrong. It is accepted by us. We’ve said it enough.
(So I could say this is “dishonest” on your part, but I’ll refrain.)

And you must be forgetting about marine organisms found on the highest ranges, from ichthyosaurs discovered over 8,900 ft high in the Swiss Alps to bivalves on top of the Himilayas. These creatures didn’t live “billions of years ago.”


There are other marine fossils, found everywhere, on mountaintops.

Again, multicellular life such as what is found in these ranges, didn’t exist “billions” of years ago.



And your statement, “the science of abiogenesis”….
There is no science for it. It is effectively unfalsifiable, negating any usefulness to real science.

The Miller-Urey experiment, often touted as evidence for abiogenesis, is like saying nails are evidence for mansions.

When are you going to recognize that your belief in abiogenesis, is based on faith?

And stop calling us dishonest.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Wrong. It is accepted by us. We’ve said it enough.
(So I could say this is “dishonest” on your part, but I’ll refrain.)

And you must be forgetting about marine organisms found on the highest ranges, from ichthyosaurs discovered over 8,900 ft high in the Swiss Alps to bivalves on top of the Himilayas. These creatures didn’t live “billions of years ago.”


There are other marine fossils, found everywhere, on mountaintops.

Again, multicellular life such as what is found in these ranges, didn’t exist “billions” of years ago.



And your statement, “the science of abiogenesis”….
There is no science for it. It is effectively unfalsifiable, negating any usefulness to real science.

The Miller-Urey experiment, often touted as evidence for abiogenesis, is like saying nails are evidence for mansions.

When are you going to recognize that your belief in abiogenesis, is based on faith?

And stop calling us dishonest.
The age of the Earth, the age of the mountains. All of it has been "proven beyond a reasonable doubt". If you do not understand that it is your fault. If you deny it you are definitely saying falsehoods and probably lyung.

If you deny that the Miller Urey test is evidence for abiogenesis you are only telling us that you do not even understand the concept of evidence. And even though it is not definitive evidence in any way that teensy tiny little bit of evidence is more than you have.

So why aren't you insulting your own myths?
 

McBell

Unbound
Actually my posts are not particularly centered around the flood of Noah's time now as recorded in Genesis, but I am looking up certain contentions some make as if there could not be water covering the earth. The earth (1) had been apparently--according to scientists--been covered with water ENTIRELY before land appeared, and (2) branches from trees could have floated in water from a flood, and take root in soil thereafter. (P.S. Scientists are saying that Mars once had lots of water...but now it is, of course, completely barren. They're looking into the geologic processes causing this.)
And once again I ask you explain how the Earth being mostly a water covered planet with little land 3.24 MILLION years ago is evidence for a world wide flood 5-6 thousand years ago...

I mean, you have to go back millions of years to a claim that the Earth MIGHT have been ....

which has absolutely nothing to do with the alleged world wide flood that allegedly happened 5-6 thousand years ago.

You seem to be grasping at straws...
 

gnostic

The Lost One
Question is not of entire or in part. Question is whether it tells of a Mesopotamian flood at all.

The part of releasing a bird on each of the 3 days comes from both the Epic of Atrahasis (tablet 3) & Epic of Gilgamesh (tablet 11 of the Standard Version found at the Library of Ashurbanipal, Nineveh). The bird event was most likely to have happened at the Eridu Genesis too, but portion of the tablet is missing.

but with regards to sacrificing to the gods, where the smell of burnt offerings were “sweet to the gods”, and where the gods promised never to send such flood again, also bear strikingly similarities to Noah’s sacrifice & God‘s promise (Genesis 8:20-22).

That the Israelites had no Genesis, no Creation and Flood stories until their sojourn (exiled) in Babylon, tell us that the Mesopotamian myths are definitely older than the Hebrew myths, as the story of Ziusudra, Atrahasis and Utnapishtim have about 2000 years history prior to Genesis was composed in the 6th century BCE.
 

shunyadragon

shunyadragon
Premium Member
Unfortunately you have it wrong. Sedimentary volcanism is described in the Dictionary of Geology & Mineralogy as the expelling, extruding or breaking through of overlying formations by a mixture of sediment, water, and gas driven by the gas under pressure.
First what you awkwardly describe is not lava. You need to get your terminology right,


Lava is molten or partially molten rock (magma) that has been expelled from the interior of a terrestrial planet (such as Earth) or a moon onto its surface. Lava may be erupted at a volcano or through a fracture in the crust, on land or underwater, usually at temperatures from 800 to 1,200 °C (1,470 to 2,190 °F). The volcanic rock resulting from subsequent cooling is also often called lava.

Sedimentary volcanism is the low-temperature ejection of weathered sedimentary materials most often associated with the release of gases and hot hydrothermal water. They occur most often around hydrothermal active regions on the sea floor and around areas like Yellowstone Park.


In contrast to volcanologists, sedimentologists are not only interested in “classical” volcanoes, but also in a second type, viz. sedimentary volcanoes. This type of volcano is helpful for sedimentologists in understanding the processes that occur in the (commonly unconsolidated) subsoil, even after deep burial.

Sedimentary volcanoes can be grouped in three classes: mud volcanoes, sand volcanoes, and associated structures such as water-escape and gas-escape structures. Mud volcanoes on deep-sea floors can become partially abraded in the course of time by ocean currents, and then are recognizable on seismic profiles as so-called pockmarks. A brief review of the various types of sedimentary volcanoes is provided, and representative examples of an active mud volcano and of a dormant mud volcano are dealt with in some more detail.

Sedimentary volcanoes have several characteristics in common with “classical” volcanoes, including their shapes and the processes that contribute to their genesis; they therefore deserve the name volcanoes, which implies that the term volcano has to be redefined.
 
Last edited:

TagliatelliMonster

Veteran Member
Here is my response to you now, including your false assessment that lava does not carry sediment.
"no one fully knows the Son except the Father; neither does anyone fully know the Father except the Son and anyone to whom the Son is willing to reveal him."
I have somewhat enjoyed speaking with you and others here, and have found on some issues you are wrong. Take care.
Your response is bonkers as it has nothing at all to do with the subjects at hand, which concern geology.
 

TagliatelliMonster

Veteran Member
And you must be forgetting about marine organisms found on the highest ranges, from ichthyosaurs discovered over 8,900 ft high in the Swiss Alps to bivalves on top of the Himilayas. These creatures didn’t live “billions of years ago.”

This has been explained ad nauseum.
Mountains FORM & GROW. When those marine organism died, they settled on the ocean floor which, through geological upthrust, became mountain tops many millions of years later.

You will not find any marine organisms that lived in the last 5000 years on top of these mountains.
You will only find fossils that are millions of years old. These organisms died when those mountains weren't yet mountains and instead the bottom of the seas where those marine organisms lived.

Funny how you accuse people of "forgetting" things when it's you who's consistently forgetting (or ignoring?) the explanations of these things.

There are other marine fossils, found everywhere, on mountaintops.

More specifically, on mountain tops that used to be the seafloor before they were mountain tops.

And your statement, “the science of abiogenesis”….
There is no science for it.


A simple google would have shown you how ignorant that statement was.

It is effectively unfalsifiable, negating any usefulness to real science.

False.

The Miller-Urey experiment, often touted as evidence for abiogenesis, is like saying nails are evidence for mansions.

False.

When are you going to recognize that your belief in abiogenesis, is based on faith?

No faith.

And stop calling us dishonest.

Kind of hard when you insist on doubling down on strawmen even after they have been pointed out a gazillion times already.
 

shunyadragon

shunyadragon
Premium Member
Wrong. It is accepted by us. We’ve said it enough.
(So I could say this is “dishonest” on your part, but I’ll refrain.)

No. The problem is the geologic record over billions of years has absolutely No evidence of a world or regional flood described in the Bible. The billions of years of rock strata contain very fundamental evidence of natural evolution and natural geologic deposition in oceans, beaches, swamps, lagoons lakes, volcanics, wind blown sediments and river sediments as are being deposited today which you reject. Selective dishonest references to justify an ancient religious agenda.
.
And you must be forgetting about marine organisms found on the highest ranges, from ichthyosaurs discovered over 8,900 ft high in the Swiss Alps to bivalves on top of the Himilayas. These creatures didn’t live “billions of years ago.”

These creatures lived hundreds millions of years ago and their remains were deposited in ocean sedimentary environments like limestone and shale.

Continental drift and mountain uplift over millions of years have folded and faulted the rock containing the fossils, By the way, the formations containing the fossils extend deep within
the mountains and not only on the surface,

There are other marine fossils, found everywhere, on mountaintops.

Of course, they lived in oceans when the sediment was deposited hundreds of millions of years ago before the tectonic up lift due to Continental drift.
Again, multicellular life such as what is found in these ranges, didn’t exist “billions” of years ago.

Yes it did, based on objectively verifiable evidence. This is the reputable reference from the Smithsonian Institute




Illustration of animals near the ocean floor 510 million years ago. A large squid-like creature hovers over smaller organisms.
Depiction of one of Earth’s ocean communities, including the top predator Anomalocaris, during the Cambrian Period 510 million years ago. By the end of the Cambrian, nearly all the major groups of animals we know today (the phyla) had evolved. Depiction by Karen Carr, Smithsonian.

In the Beginning​

Today we take for granted that we live among diverse communities of animals that feed on each other. Our ecosystems are structured by feeding relationships like killer whales eating seals, which eat squid, which feed on krill. These and other animals require oxygen to extract energy from their food. But that’s not how life on Earth used to be.
With an environment devoid of oxygen and high in methane, for much of its history Earth would not have been a welcoming place for animals. The earliest life forms we know of were microscopic organisms (microbes) that left signals of their presence in rocks about 3.7 billion years old. The signals consisted of a type of carbon molecule that is produced by living things.
Evidence of microbes was also preserved in the hard structures (“stromatolites”) they made, which date to 3.5 billion years ago. Stromatolites are created as sticky mats of microbes trap and bind sediments into layers. Minerals precipitate inside the layers, creating durable structures even as the microbes die off. Scientists study today’s, rare living stromatolite reefs to better understand Earth’s earliest life forms.


And your statement, “the science of abiogenesis”….
There is no science for it. It is effectively unfalsifiable, negating any usefulness to real science.
Your intentional ignorance of science is abominable, based on an ancient tribal agenda..
The Miller-Urey experiment, often touted as evidence for abiogenesis, is like saying nails are evidence for mansions.

Actually, this is oldy moldy. There have been over fifty years of research on abiogenesis since.
When are you going to recognize that your belief in abiogenesis, is based on faith?

And stop calling us dishonest.

When are you going to give up your ancient tribal religious agenda based on your intentional ignorance of science as documented above.

I documented above your over-the-top dishonesty.

The references provided above reflect the views of ALL the major universities and academic institutions of the world. You have provided no legitimate academic references based on actual science.
 
Last edited:

metis

aged ecumenical anthropologist
Wrong. It is accepted by us. We’ve said it enough.
(So I could say this is “dishonest” on your part, but I’ll refrain.)

And you must be forgetting about marine organisms found on the highest ranges, from ichthyosaurs discovered over 8,900 ft high in the Swiss Alps to bivalves on top of the Himilayas. These creatures didn’t live “billions of years ago.”


There are other marine fossils, found everywhere, on mountaintops.

Again, multicellular life such as what is found in these ranges, didn’t exist “billions” of years ago.



And your statement, “the science of abiogenesis”….
There is no science for it. It is effectively unfalsifiable, negating any usefulness to real science.

The Miller-Urey experiment, often touted as evidence for abiogenesis, is like saying nails are evidence for mansions.

When are you going to recognize that your belief in abiogenesis, is based on faith?

And stop calling us dishonest.
This is caused by the movement of plates whereas ridges often get elevated because one plate goes under the other, and this is happening all over the world.

BTW, the sharper the points of the peaks are typically indicative of newer mountains, so that the Rocky Mountains are younger than the Great Smokies.
 
Top