Evidence of the Great Flood has been found; or not?

[james dixon]

I would bet on aliens before I would bet on the adam and eve myth..

Actually I am with you on this one. I believe aliens seeded this planet with their DNA just as we will seed some far off planet in our far off future; unless we destroy ourselves first. In fact I believe these aliens are watching us (humans) right now.

 

[james dixon]

I'm sorry but there is no evidence supporting the idea of a singular global flood and plenty of evidence directly contradicting the idea.

At this point in time none of these views can be "proven". I will rest in peace with my views and I can only hope you rest in peace with yours. Which for me concludes this debate.

take care -

 

[jonathan180iq]

Geography4Kids.com: Biosphere: Erosion

 

[Polymath257]

I WAS RESPONDING TO YOUR STATEMENT:
II can not believe any one could be so naive, as to base their faith, on having to believe that mythical stories are based on historical happening

Not my statement, although I sympathize with it.

Adam & Eve are biblical myths in your view and yet the human race had to start somewhere.

But certainly NOT in this way. You can learn a bit of archeology to find out more details.

This is the connection between faith and life as I see it -

Delusion and ignorance?

 

[james dixon]

Why are there seashells on the top of Mount Everest? No I didn’t put them there. The answer is simple. 4400 years ago there was a world wide flood that covered every mountain. The mountains became the temporary home for ocean dwelling animals. When the flood receded they were trapped in the rock and are still there today

http://practicalapologetics.blogspot.com/2007/10/why-are-there-seashells-and-fossils-on.html

Fossilized sea life lies atop every major mountain range on earth—far above sea level and usually far from the nearest body of water. Attempts to explain “seashells on mountaintops” have generated controversy for centuries.a

An early explanation was that a global flood covered these mountains, allowing clams and other sea life to “crawl” far and high.

http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/EarthSciences16.html

Evidence 1: Fossils of sea creatures high above sea level due to the ocean waters having flooded over the continents

We find fossils of sea creatures in rock layers that cover all the continents. For example, most of the rock layers in the walls of Grand Canyon (more than a mile above sea level) contain marine fossils. Fossilized shellfish are even found in the Himalayas.
Focus in: High & Dry Sea Creatures
Evidence 2: Rapid burial of plants and animals

We find extensive fossil “graveyards” and exquisitely preserved fossils. For example, billions of nautiloid fossils are found in a layer within the Redwall Limestone of Grand Canyon. This layer was deposited catastrophically by a massive flow of sediment (mostly lime sand). The chalk and coal beds of Europe and the United States, and the fish, ichthyosaurs, insects, and other fossils all around the world, testify of catastrophic destruction and burial.
Focus in: The World’s a Graveyard
Evidence 3: Rapidly deposited sediment layers spread across vast areas

We find rock layers that can be traced all the way across continents—even between continents—and physical features in those strata indicate they were deposited rapidly. For example, the Tapeats Sandstone and Redwall Limestone of Grand Canyon can be traced across the entire United States, up into Canada, and even across the Atlantic Ocean to England. The chalk beds of England (the white cliffs of Dover) can be traced across Europe into the Middle East and are also found in the Midwest of the United States and in Western Australia. Inclined (sloping) layers within the Coconino Sandstone of Grand Canyon are testimony to 10,000 cubic miles of sand being deposited by huge water currents within days.
Focus in: Transcontinental Rock Layers
Evidence 4: Sediment transported long distances

We find that the sediments in those widespread, rapidly deposited rock layers had to be eroded from distant sources and carried long distances by fast-moving water. For example, the sand for the Coconino Sandstone of Grand Canyon (Arizona) had to be eroded and transported from the northern portion o74f what is now the United States and Canada. Furthermore, water current indicators (such as ripple marks) preserved in rock layers show that for “300 million years” water currents were consistently flowing from northeast to southwest across all of North and South America, which, of course, is only possible over weeks during a global Flood.
Focus in: Sand Transported Cross Country
Evidence 5: Rapid or no erosion between strata

We find evidence of rapid erosion, or even of no erosion, between rock layers. Flat, knife-edge boundaries between rock layers indicate continuous deposition of one layer after another, with no time for erosion. For example, there is no evidence of any “missing” millions of years (of erosion) in the flat boundary between two well-known layers of Grand Canyon—the Coconino Sandstone and the Hermit Formation. Another impressive example of flat boundaries at Grand Canyon is the Redwall Limestone and the strata beneath it.

 

[Wirey]

Just because you do not believe it does not prove it did not occur.



In my view biblical scripture was written using analogies to explain events in a form that the people at the time could understand.

-

Just because it's in your view doesn't mean it happened. It's a myth not backed up by science or observable evidence.

 

[HonestJoe]

At this point in time none of these views can be "proven". I will rest in peace with my views and I can only hope you rest in peace with yours. Which for me concludes this debate.

The various evidence that contradicts a literal interpretation of the Biblical flood can most certainly be proven. The idea of a worldwide flood covering all land on he planet (to the height of Everest as your later post suggests) can be disproved with basic maths to calculate the volume of water that would be necessary (unless you propose "magical" divine intervention of course). All of the legitimate evidence you've presented could be explained by regional events so don't in themselves support the idea of any singular global flood.

I need no "peace" in this, it's of merely academic interest to me. I wouldn't care if there had been a global flood though I care a little about dishonest hypotheses being presented.

And if the debate was concluded for you here, why did you make a subsequent post presenting further information?

 

[DavidFirth]

It is not true that all people who accept fantasy as fact are safely locked up.
In my experience...
Some prove to be quite harmless, and live in fairy land.
And create threads about Genesis for this forum.

Some people actually believe that life came from non-life. Crazy times for sure.

 

[DavidFirth]

Yes, but they are all creationist sites.

So? You allergic to creationist sites? Or just biased against them?

 

[DavidFirth]

This reminds me of talking to profeticide people. They will look straight at elementary science and dismiss it because it doesn't match the beliefs that they are already attached to.
Tom

Creation science is real, though, whether you like it or agree with it or not.

 

[james dixon]

Just because it's in your view doesn't mean it happened. It's a myth not backed up by science or observable evidence.

If it were a "myth" we would not be talking about it now.

-

 

[james dixon]

The various evidence that contradicts a literal interpretation of the Biblical flood can most certainly be proven.

Then by all means; prove it.,,/\.,.,

I'm all ears -

The idea of a worldwide flood covering all land on the planet (to the height of Everest as your later post suggests) can be disproved with basic maths

Then by all means; prove it.,,/\.,.,

I'm all ears -

What I believe is the sea floor at the time was basically flat. And over time the mountain was pushed up above the sea to the now mountain. height. Bring with it the sea floor.

All of the legitimate evidence you've presented could be.,.,..,,.

yes it could

I need no "peace" in this,.

There just isn't enough peace going around. We all need some "peace", including you; in my view -

I care a little about dishonest hypotheses being presented.

And yet here you are; responding.

thank you -

And if the debate was concluded for you here, why did you make a subsequent post presenting further information?

I changed my mind -

 

[james dixon]

Even if you do manage to proove there was a great flood, it still does not prove a God created it.

I never said God created it. If you thought I did you are mistaken -

 

[Altfish]

So? You allergic to creationist sites? Or just biased against them?

Visited them many times and marvelled at their anti-science postings. I continue to visit for a laugh and I now treat them as a source of humour. Ken Ham in particular is hilarious but fair play he is making millions out of gullible people and Christian councils who fund his crack-pot ideas. As for Kent and Eric Hovind..words fail me.

 

[Tiapan]

If you are an atheist or not is not the issue here. I have provided visual evidence of a great flood that coo berates the biblical account. Coincident or not it does provide some truth to the biblical account; as I see it.

b.t.w. this did not come from a web site; next
-

These are not the result of "the Great Flood" although I am sure there are many wet periods over the eons. All the examples are instead the effect of droplets of rain and puffs of air over BILLIONS of Years.
Have you of any of the people you quote, actually gone to the areas mentioned with a little pick and shovel and sampled the actual rock. Measured its age and looked for rounding typical of water erosion.
A flood causes a chaos of mixed sediments these all appear very regular.
Cheers

 

[Tiapan]

Creation science is real, though, whether you like it or agree with it or not.

Prove it!

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

If it were a "myth" we would not be talking about it now.

-

By there nature myths are stories that are continuously talked about down the ages.
Talking about them and repeating them does not make them true.

They are similar to fables, which no one believe to be true. Where as myths are based on a story or event that is now disproved, or on folklore.

 

[HonestJoe]

Then by all means; prove it.,,/\.,.,

As I’d already mentioned, there are examples of written history around the world from before are through the proposed Biblical timelines that make literally no mention of a world-wide flood (and would have been destroyed by it anyway). There are also historic structures pre-dating the traditional flood chronology (indeed, predating traditional Biblical creation chronology).

If you want anything more specific, you’d first need to explain in detail how and when you believe this flood occurred (you already seem to be a few steps away from literal Biblical interpretation after all). It would also be better if you addressed all of the information in this area by the various experts in their fields rather than demanding proof from random laymen on forums.

What I believe is the sea floor at the time was basically flat. And over time the mountain was pushed up above the sea to the now mountain. height. Bring with it the sea floor.

That’s generally recognised geology (it’s what accounts for seashells on some mountain ranges after all). What isn’t supported by the geological evidence is it all happening in one go or during modern human history.

yes it could

Which is why the all too common line of presenting a position and expecting others to disprove it is flawed. To assert a positive hypothesis you need to provide positive evidence supporting it.

I changed my mind -

Good to know that’s an option.

 

[DavidFirth]

Visited them many times and marvelled at their anti-science postings. I continue to visit for a laugh and I now treat them as a source of humour. Ken Ham in particular is hilarious but fair play he is making millions out of gullible people and Christian councils who fund his crack-pot ideas. As for Kent and Eric Hovind..words fail me.

I also think the outlandish theories of non-Creationists are rather hilarious and dull. It's amazing how far one will stretch his faith to get the answers one wishes to get.

 

[metis]

Creation science is real, though,

We refer to this as being "pseudo-science" as it has a conclusion, and then goes about trying to prove the conclusion by cherry-picking or inventing "evidence". So, it assumes the Biblical creation accounts are absolutely correct, and then they try to justify that which is unjustifiable.

IOW, it is not science in any way.