Flood Evidences — revised

[Dan From Smithville]

What’s amazing, is how you don’t want to reason on it. We’re talking world-wide, with water rising everywhere, not falling (except that water which rained). It didn’t have anywhere to “rush” to, lol.

So, in your mind, even though there is nothing mentioned about the world being completely level, the world was completely level. Is that what you are saying?

You don't understand and I doubt you ever will. You cannot think in the terms necessary to understand what it is you are trying to claim and how little you know about it.

The land is not uniform. There would have been places that filled up first and other places that water would have rushed too. There would have been currents from the mixing of water of different salt content and temperatures. There would have been tremendous energy released.

The waters covered the Earth for over a year, the Southern and Northern — especially the Northern — latitudes covered in ice and snow. (Yes, that’s my deduction.)

The ice caps would have been obliterated, moved around. Look at the Helheim Glacier and how just normal sea level water is tearing off miles of the glacier at a time. If it has only been 4,000 years since the flood, the icecaps would not exist. If it was 100,000's or 1,000,000's of years ago, then there are so many other things that you will have to explain. You just have no where to run. Every turn takes you were you cannot explain your way out.

Finally, when the waters receded (into the ocean basins as they sank), that’s when the rushing would begin.

I agree. Rushing water would have occurred then too. And we do not see the mixing that would have had to occurred with the rushing water at the beginning and at the end.

Your nasty and scoffing attitude, I don’t need. (Such closed-mindedness!) No more explaining things to you, I’m through.

You are the nasty one, talking about not knowing what god I worshiped. That was pretty low. Your closed mind is typical of creationists.

You don't have to pay attention to me. I don't care. I take that to mean you have no way to really challenge the points I have made.

What you are doing is asking people to lie to themselves and ignore evidence, while excepting the poorest and most useless offering as if it were strong evidence. I understand that you have to do this, but do you really? What benefit do you really get?

 

[Dan From Smithville]

I know. slow rising water would not cover the Earth. Slow draining water would take far more than a year to go away if the magic flood was to leave no physical evidence at all.

And all that time, there would be a layer building up, that we find no where in the world.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

The various frozen mammoths found are of different dates

The frozen ones, that still have flesh on them? I don’t think so.

Give me a reference, please.


.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

The frozen ones, that still have flesh on them? I don’t think so.

Give me a reference, please.


.

If they are of the same date, then you give us a reference. You are the one making the claim that they are.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

The frozen ones, that still have flesh on them? I don’t think so.

Give me a reference, please.


.

Well, the found one in Siberia that was 39,000 years old. Another was 35,000 years old. One found in Alaska was 25,000 years old. A small calf found in Siberia was 40,000 years old. Then there is one that was 20,000 years old. Another that was 18,000 years old.

So the flood must have taken place 18,000, no, 20,000, no, 25,000, no, 35,000, no, 39,000, no, 40,000 years ago.

These frozen mammoths all show signs of decay followed by freezing and then desication indicating that they rotted prior to freezing.

The theory of evolution is so robust in its predictive power that Shubin and Daeschler were able to predict where to look for transitional fossils and discovered tiktaalik. The flood is of no value at predicting, since none of those mammoths died at the same time. They are not evidence in support of a global flood.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

The frozen ones, that still have flesh on them? I don’t think so.

Give me a reference, please.


.

I have no issue with what you want to believe and I believe that you do worship God. I may not have a preference for the denomination you have chosen, but that is your choice. I do not think Jehovah's Witnesses are any better positioned than any other denomination. You may think so, and that is fine. Think as you choose. I do not agree with what you are doing regarding the Bible, which appears to be deifying it. But it is hypocritical of you to make the comments you make and then call me nasty.

 

[sooda]

Interesting. I did not know this. I am not a mammalogist. Just a simple entomologist.

Imagine the surprise when they found mammoth remains in the Nefud desert???

In any case, the Mammoths survived Noah's "global flood".

Wrangel Island is an island in the Arctic Ocean, between the Chukchi Sea and East Siberian Sea. Wrangel Island lies astride the 180° meridian. The International Date Line is displaced eastwards at this latitude to avoid the island as well as the Chukchi Peninsula on the Russian mainland. The closest land to Wrangel Island is the tiny and rocky Herald Island located 60 km (37 mi) to the east. The distance to the closest point on the mainland is 140 km (87 mi). Wrangel Island may have been the last place on earth where mammoths survived.

 

[Subduction Zone]

The frozen ones, that still have flesh on them? I don’t think so.

Give me a reference, please.


.

I already did. You should have paid attention. Of course you should have found a source by people that were not loons that supported your claim to start with:

Woolly Mammoths: Evidence of Catastrophe?

Woolly mammoth - Wikipedia
(Scroll down to Frozen Specimens)

I could find individual sources on the dates if you wish, but the articles due refer to them.

 

[sooda]

So, in your mind, even though there is nothing mentioned about the world being completely level, the world was completely level. Is that what you are saying?

You don't understand and I doubt you ever will. You cannot think in the terms necessary to understand what it is you are trying to claim and how little you know about it.

The land is not uniform. There would have been places that filled up first and other places that water would have rushed too. There would have been currents from the mixing of water of different salt content and temperatures. There would have been tremendous energy released.
The ice caps would have been obliterated, moved around. Look at the Helheim Glacier and how just normal sea level water is tearing off miles of the glacier at a time. If it has only been 4,000 years since the flood, the icecaps would not exist. If it was 100,000's or 1,000,000's of years ago, then there are so many other things that you will have to explain. You just have no where to run. Every turn takes you were you cannot explain your way out.
I agree. Rushing water would have occurred then too. And we do not see the mixing that would have had to occurred with the rushing water at the beginning and at the end.

You are the nasty one, talking about not knowing what god I worshiped. That was pretty low. Your closed mind is typical of creationists.

You don't have to pay attention to me. I don't care. I take that to mean you have no way to really challenge the points I have made.

What you are doing is asking people to lie to themselves and ignore evidence, while excepting the poorest and most useless offering as if it were strong evidence. I understand that you have to do this, but do you really? What benefit do you really get?

4,000 years since the flood you say. Funny that the Mammoths survived it and so did the Babylonians and Egyptians.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

I already did. You should have paid attention. Of course you should have found a source by people that were not loons that supported your claim to start with:

Woolly Mammoths: Evidence of Catastrophe?

Woolly mammoth - Wikipedia
(Scroll down to Frozen Specimens)

I could find individual sources on the dates if you wish, but the articles due refer to them.

Very few “loons” support all of these scenarios I’ve presented, I think. Most are YEC’s, I’m not.

Your faith in C14 is misplaced, I’m afraid:

New Radiocarbon Dating Information Changes Mammoth Extinction

33% off! Crazy! (I’m glad they owned up to it.)

Who knows when the ‘improvements’ will make it completely trustworthy?
The whole problem with scientific dating techniques, is they rely on ‘the present being the key to the past’. That’s irresponsible, especially w/ C14.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

I know. slow rising water would not cover the Earth. Slow draining water would take far more than a year to go away if the magic flood was to leave no physical evidence at all.

Please! The erosion of the Grand Canyon, is evidence alone, created when the waters receded.
“The Colorado River eroded it, beginning millions of years ago”? Really?

Then where’s the delta, from all that sediment?

How did the Colorado form the side canyons, running into the Grand Canyon?

As I said before, geologists can explain very little, because they refuse to look at the Big Picture.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Very few “loons” support all of these scenarios I’ve presented, I think. Most are YEC’s, I’m not.

Your faith in C14 is misplaced, I’m afraid:

New Radiocarbon Dating Information Changes Mammoth Extinction

33% off! Crazy! (I’m glad they owned up to it.)

Who knows when the ‘improvements’ will make it completely trustworthy?
The whole problem with scientific dating techniques, is they rely on ‘the present being the key to the past’. That’s irresponsible, especially w/ C14.

Sorry, one amateur article does not support that claim. Yes, there can be errors in individual dates. That is why they are often retested. For example one of the dates that creationists sometimes site is one of a hide that had been soaked in glycerin. Do you understand why that is a no-no?

But yes, most of your sources are from loons and you admitted it. YEC's cannot support any of their beliefs using scientific evidence. That puts them in the loon category for me.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Please! The erosion of the Grand Canyon, is evidence alone, created when the waters receded.
“The Colorado River eroded it, beginning millions of years ago”? Really?

Then where’s the delta, from all that sediment?

How did the Colorado form the side canyons, running into the Grand Canyon?

As I said before, geologists can explain very little, because they refuse to look at the Big Picture.

Nope, don't conflate the erosion from Mt. St. Helens with that of the Grand Canyon. Though not obvious to the uneducated the Grand Canyon has quite a few meanders in it. One cannot have rapid erosion and meanders. Here is an image of a tributary to the Grand Canyon:

That is about as embedded of a meander as you are going to find. It could not have been eroded rapidly. In fact it could not have even started with the flood. Would you like to go over why?

ETA:: I missed the question about the delta of the Grand Canyon. Most of those sediments are probably in central California. You have heard of the San Andreas Fault I hope.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

I already did. You should have paid attention. Of course you should have found a source by people that were not loons that supported your claim to start with:

Woolly Mammoths: Evidence of Catastrophe?

Woolly mammoth - Wikipedia
(Scroll down to Frozen Specimens)

I could find individual sources on the dates if you wish, but the articles due refer to them.

I do appreciate you reposting the links, thanks.
But...

The Talk.origins article apparently needs updating. Excerpt:

“Ted keeps trying to date mammoths within the last 3000 years. In my research I found absolutely nothing that was dated at that time period. The following is from On the Track of the Ice Age Mammals by Sutcliffe:

"The absolute age in years of the frozen carcasses was for a long time a subject of speculation. During recent years, with the availability of Carbon 14 dating, the exact age of many of them has become known, with surprising results. Their ages fall into two main groups, one ranging in age from 45,000 years to 30,000 years and a smaller number of remains from 14-11,000 years old.

"Although skeletal remains lacking soft parts are known from the period 30-12,000 years ago, there is very little carcass material of this age. A tendon on a 22,000-years-old bone of a lion from Alaska is one of the rare examples. As we have already seen, this intervening period was a time of massive glacial advance, the ice sheets in the northern hemisphere expanding to their maximum extent about 18,000 years ago. There were minor, more temperate periods from about 45-25,000 years ago and about 12-11,000 years ago....” ”

That seems inaccurate:

https://io9.gizmodo.com/the-last-mammoths-died-out-just-3600-years-ago-but-th-5896262

 

[Subduction Zone]

I do appreciate you reposting the links, thanks.
But...

The Talk.origins article apparently needs updating. Excerpt:

“Ted keeps trying to date mammoths within the last 3000 years. In my research I found absolutely nothing that was dated at that time period. The following is from On the Track of the Ice Age Mammals by Sutcliffe:

"The absolute age in years of the frozen carcasses was for a long time a subject of speculation. During recent years, with the availability of Carbon 14 dating, the exact age of many of them has become known, with surprising results. Their ages fall into two main groups, one ranging in age from 45,000 years to 30,000 years and a smaller number of remains from 14-11,000 years old.

"Although skeletal remains lacking soft parts are known from the period 30-12,000 years ago, there is very little carcass material of this age. A tendon on a 22,000-years-old bone of a lion from Alaska is one of the rare examples. As we have already seen, this intervening period was a time of massive glacial advance, the ice sheets in the northern hemisphere expanding to their maximum extent about 18,000 years ago. There were minor, more temperate periods from about 45-25,000 years ago and about 12-11,000 years ago....” ”

That seems inaccurate:

https://io9.gizmodo.com/the-last-mammoths-died-out-just-3600-years-ago-but-th-5896262

Why is it inaccurate? You do not seem to realize that freezing of mammoth parts is not the norm. That required a rather specific climate. As you know climate changes over time. It appears there were two periods of time that were favorable for preservation of carcasses by freezing. And it still was a very rare event. There are far more bones found than frozen carcasses. They are much easier to preserve.

ETA: I just read the article that you linked and once again it does not support your claim. Mammoths could have survived but it tells you the most likely reason that they did not. There is no contradiction there.

 

[james dixon]

I refuse to believe that there are some folks who deny floods occur; they do. When speaking about the “Biblical Flood” you must consider the persons who wrote about this event. In this time frame peopled believed the earth was flat.

A recent report by the UN, “The Human Cost of Weather Related Disasters”

The report and analysis, compiled by the UN Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNISDR) and the Belgian-based Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters (CRED), says that between 1995 and 2015, there were 3,062 flood disasters.
You are being redirected...

When you read the biblical verses concerning the “Great Flood” you must consider the timeline when these verses were written. During this time period people believed the earth was flat. Knowing this when some people see water for as far as the eye can see, they are seeing a “great flood”.

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

Practical Apologetics: Why are there seashells and fossils on mt everest?
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
In the Beginning: Compelling Evidence for Creation and the Flood - 130. Flood Legends

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

Focus in: Transcontinental Rock Layers
Evidence 4: Sediment transported long distances

I also read where people deny the flood because they cannot account for the water that would be needed. This too can be explained. The northern half of our planet was once covered in ice.

The finding appears to add solid evidence to the theory of an ancient "snowball Earth."

The discovery hinged on proving that the right rocks had been covered by glaciers in the right place at the right time.

Study leader Francis Macdonald, an Earth scientist at Harvard University, and col-leagues worked with volcanic rocks in Canada that were found sandwiched be-tween glacial deposits. Such deposits are recognizable by the presence of debris left behind by melting glaciers and sediments deformed by glacial movement.

The finding appears to add solid evidence to the theory of an ancient "snowball Earth."

Study leader Francis Macdonald, an Earth scientist at Harvard University, and colleagues worked with volcanic rocks in Canada that were found sandwiched between glacial deposits. Such deposits are recognizable by the presence of debris left behind by melting glaciers and sediments deformed by glacial movement.
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2010/03/100304-snowball-earth-ice-global-warming/

and this~~~~~

The finding appears to add solid evidence to the theory of an ancient "snowball Earth."
National Geographic News and Latest Stories

 

[sooda]

So, in your mind, even though there is nothing mentioned about the world being completely level, the world was completely level. Is that what you are saying?

You don't understand and I doubt you ever will. You cannot think in the terms necessary to understand what it is you are trying to claim and how little you know about it.

The land is not uniform. There would have been places that filled up first and other places that water would have rushed too. There would have been currents from the mixing of water of different salt content and temperatures. There would have been tremendous energy released.
The ice caps would have been obliterated, moved around. Look at the Helheim Glacier and how just normal sea level water is tearing off miles of the glacier at a time. If it has only been 4,000 years since the flood, the icecaps would not exist. If it was 100,000's or 1,000,000's of years ago, then there are so many other things that you will have to explain. You just have no where to run. Every turn takes you were you cannot explain your way out.
I agree. Rushing water would have occurred then too. And we do not see the mixing that would have had to occurred with the rushing water at the beginning and at the end.

You are the nasty one, talking about not knowing what god I worshiped. That was pretty low. Your closed mind is typical of creationists.

You don't have to pay attention to me. I don't care. I take that to mean you have no way to really challenge the points I have made.

What you are doing is asking people to lie to themselves and ignore evidence, while excepting the poorest and most useless offering as if it were strong evidence. I understand that you have to do this, but do you really? What benefit do you really get?

Who was writing about the flood 100,000 years ago?

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Who was writing about the flood 100,000 years ago?

No one that I know of. It would have been difficult since there is no evidence of a written language prior to about 5 or 6 thousand years ago.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I refuse to believe that there are some folks who deny floods occur; they do. When speaking about the “Biblical Flood” you must consider the persons who wrote about this event. In this time frame peopled believed the earth was flat.

A recent report by the UN, “The Human Cost of Weather Related Disasters”

The report and analysis, compiled by the UN Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNISDR) and the Belgian-based Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters (CRED), says that between 1995 and 2015, there were 3,062 flood disasters.
You are being redirected...

When you read the biblical verses concerning the “Great Flood” you must consider the timeline when these verses were written. During this time period people believed the earth was flat. Knowing this when some people see water for as far as the eye can see, they are seeing a “great flood”.

View attachment 32321

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

Practical Apologetics: Why are there seashells and fossils on mt everest?
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
In the Beginning: Compelling Evidence for Creation and the Flood - 130. Flood Legends

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

Focus in: Transcontinental Rock Layers
Evidence 4: Sediment transported long distances

I also read where people deny the flood because they cannot account for the water that would be needed. This too can be explained. The northern half of our planet was once covered in ice.

The finding appears to add solid evidence to the theory of an ancient "snowball Earth."

The discovery hinged on proving that the right rocks had been covered by glaciers in the right place at the right time.

Study leader Francis Macdonald, an Earth scientist at Harvard University, and col-leagues worked with volcanic rocks in Canada that were found sandwiched be-tween glacial deposits. Such deposits are recognizable by the presence of debris left behind by melting glaciers and sediments deformed by glacial movement.

The finding appears to add solid evidence to the theory of an ancient "snowball Earth."

Study leader Francis Macdonald, an Earth scientist at Harvard University, and colleagues worked with volcanic rocks in Canada that were found sandwiched between glacial deposits. Such deposits are recognizable by the presence of debris left behind by melting glaciers and sediments deformed by glacial movement.
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2010/03/100304-snowball-earth-ice-global-warming/

and this~~~~~

The finding appears to add solid evidence to the theory of an ancient "snowball Earth."
National Geographic News and Latest Stories

I am sorry, but if one understands all of the observations that you referred to they are all evidence against the Noah's Ark Myth.

If you want to discuss them properly, that means one at a time, I will gladly do so with you.

 

[sooda]

No one that I know of. It would have been difficult since there is no evidence of a written language prior to about 5 or 6 thousand years ago.

This idiocy is a huge setback for educated Christians.