Flood Evidences — revised

[Jose Fly]

Oh. my. goodness! Grief!
I didn’t ask *what* the Permafrost was, did I?
I asked how it began, and why are those animals found within it?
And exactly how did it get to be 1000m deep in places?

Seriously? You don't know any of that, yet you also feel confident in declaring....

It must have happened suddenly, to have so many well-preserved specimens being discovered!

Are you just irony impaired?

No, you’ve been snide with me quite a few times. Sad, really.

Well, it's kinda hard not to be given things like the above.

Is it not recorded as a divine event, in Scripture?
So what should be expected?

And that renders all claims that it is scientifically supported meaningless.

That’s why I point out the evidences we can see of its aftermath.

Except you don't. When we ask basic questions about that (e.g. the heat problem) you just say "God did that part".

I know you really want to have it both ways, where you get to claim that the Biblical flood is supported by science while simultaneously invoking the gods whenever the evidence doesn't support it, but that sort of nonsense only works with your fellow believers. The rest of us see right through it.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

Seriously? You don't know any of that, yet you also feel confident in declaring....


Are you just irony impaired?


Well, it's kinda hard not to be given things like the above.


And that renders all claims that it is scientifically supported meaningless.


Except you don't. When we ask basic questions about that (e.g. the heat problem) you just say "God did that part".

I know you really want to have it both ways, where you get to claim that the Biblical flood is supported by science while simultaneously invoking the gods whenever the evidence doesn't support it, but that sort of nonsense only works with your fellow believers. The rest of us see right through it.

Again, you just willfully ignore the evidence in the Permafrost; some of it, deep within it.

And so much more of the evidences. It’s all coincidences to you

You don’t see anything, my misguided cousin.

I wish you the best, but goodbye.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

Seriously? You don't know any of that…

No I don’t know how it began .

And neither can you explain how it’s 1000m deep in places, with specimens of megafauna encased within it.

Just ignore it, that’s the ticket.

 

[Sheldon]

The geological record demonstrates unequivocally that no global flood has ever occurred.

 

[metis]

how it’s 1000m deep in places, with specimens of megafauna encased within it.

Because during some warm periods, parts of the Arctic had tropical plants and animals, plus there was literally no snow anywhere on Earth as far as the geologists know during these spells.

 

[Jose Fly]

No I don’t know how it began .

Says the person who also declared...

"It must have happened suddenly, to have so many well-preserved specimens being discovered!"​

I simply do not get creationists.....at all. Maybe one day I'll understand how y'all can do this sort of thing while being completely oblivious to it, but at the moment....I honestly have no clue how you live with yourselves.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

Slow processes do not preserve animals; preservation requires quick action, to prevent decay.

it’s an obvious conclusion, for thinkers.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Is there are reference indicating that frozen animals have been found at the greater depths of the Siberian permafrost?

What other means of preserving dead animals quickly would explain the presence of these carcasses in the permafrost or should we all just pretend that it could only happen from a global flood?

Edit: Scientific references for the above.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Slow processes do not preserve animals; preservation requires quick action, to prevent decay.

it’s an obvious conclusion, for thinkers.

How quick? Since when thawed there are often claims of a god awful aroma I think it might not be as fast as you think. In fact if a mammoth died at the start of winter it could easily have four months or more of time to get buried. I am totally unaware of the conditions that one would have found up there when the glaciers were advancing.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

Excerpt from
What caused extinction of the Pleistocene megafauna of Sahul? :


“The two most widely accepted agents of extinction are human impact and climate change….”

Human impact is laughable; even from population numbers accepted by some scientists, there simply weren’t enough humans, spread throughout the globe, to cause the demise of that many animals!

Climate change is the only viable explanation. And because so many of those extinct megafauna species have been discovered well- preserved, such a climate happened very quickly, during some catastrophic event. The Flood accounts for that evidence. Explains it well, actually. Encasing those animals in the quick formation of water into ice due to extreme drop of temperature, caused by the ruptures of the Biblically-described Earth-covering canopy, which acted somewhat like a greenhouse for Earth…..those ruptures which released some of the water, would have drastically altered the atmosphere, too. The destruction of that canopy would have allowed the Sun’s radiation to hit the Earth with the force it has now, forever changing — increasing — the c14 decay in organisms.

IOW, the canopy (which existed prior to the Flood) reduced the rate of decay, thereby making it appear that animals that died prior to, or even at, the Flood, died further back.

The jump in dates using C14 measurements, on organic objects 5000 years and older, is well-documented. But usually not willingly divulged.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Doing some quick Googling. This is the best preserved wooly mammoth every found in the US:

That looks a bit less than pristine to me.


Frozen baby mammoth discovered in Yukon excites Canada

 

[Subduction Zone]

Excerpt from

:

“The two most widely accepted agents of extinction are human impact and climate change….”

Human impact is laughable; even from population numbers accepted by some scientists, there simply weren’t enough humans to cause the demise of that many animals!

Climate change is the only viable explanation. And because so many of those extinct megafauna species have been discovered well- preserved, such a climate happened very quickly, during some catastrophic event. The Flood accounts for that evidence. Explains it well, actually. Encasing those animals in the quick formation of water into ice due to extreme drop of temperature, caused by the ruptures of the Biblically-described Earth-covering canopy, which acted somewhat like a greenhouse for Earth…..those ruptures which released some of the water, would have drastically altered the atmosphere, too. The destruction of that canopy would have allowed the Sun’s radiation to hit the Earth with the force it has now, forever changing — increasing — the c14 decay in organisms.

IOW, the canopy (which existed prior to the Flood) reduced the rate of decay, thereby making it appear that animals that died prior to, or even at, the Flood, died further back.

The jump in dates using C14 measurements, on organic objects 5000 years and older, is well-documented. But usually not eagerly divulged.

Please don't rely on arguments from ignorance. They are not very convincing. And the only "jumps" that I know of in carbon dating were done by creationists when they conflated the dates of two different animals that they thought were one. But maybe you can find a valid source for this claim. I certainly do not know of one.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

should we all just pretend…

i thought you were better than that.

i don’t care what you do, anymore.

 

[Subduction Zone]

i thought you were better than that.

i don’t care what you do, anymore.

When you cannot justify your claims it looks as if you are only pretending.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

I have seen no evidence that humans could not be the cause of the widespread extinction of megafauna. Does anyone have evidence that humans could not have been the driving force behind that loss?

 

[Dan From Smithville]

i thought you were better than that.

i don’t care what you do, anymore.

What is wrong with that? That is what the call is out for. Care or not, I am not going to agree something happened based on evidence when that evidence doesn't exist. That goes against my beliefs.

There is no evidence for a water canopy above the earth. Poor speculation with no evidence and many reasons that it fails.

There is no evidence of a global flash freeze and, in light of physics, it simply couldn't happen.

All the evidence that is claimed as evidence for a global flood is questionable, absent or wild speculation with no basis.

It is up to you to provide a scientifically sound explanation for the megafauna carcasses that addresses and invalidates any other explanation. Encouraging everyone to pretend that it could only happen your way is not that explanation.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

Mystery of the Mammoth and the Buttercups | Geophysical Institute :


“In the early part of this century the famous Beresovka mammoth carcass was discovered in Siberia. Nearly intact, the animal was found buried in silty gravel sitting in the upright position. The mammoth had a broken foreleg, evidently caused by a fall from a nearby cliff 10,000 years ago. The remains of its stomach were intact and there were grasses and buttercups lodged between its teeth. The flesh was still edible, but reportedly not tasty.

No one has ever satisfactorily explained how the Beresovka mammoth and other animals found frozen in the subarctic could have been frozen before being consumed by predators of the time. Some have proposed a sudden change in climate, but this hardly seems a likely explanation. The scientist who uncovered the Beresovka mammoth conjectured that the animal fell into a snow-filled ravine that protected the body until it was perhaps covered by gravel during a summer flood.”

And here’s a feeble attempt to debunk it (all the author does is ramble on & on, providing excepts of documents which really really end up denying his attempt):

Younger Dryas Myth-Busting: Flash-Frozen Mammoths Edition – Watts Up With That?

‘That’s all he has to say’….yep, lol.

mammoth on display:
The Best-Preserved Woolly Mammoth Goes on Display in Japan, But Should We Resurrect it?

 

[Hockeycowboy]

What is wrong with that? That is what the call is out for. Care or not, I am not going to agree something happened based on evidence when that evidence doesn't exist. That goes against my beliefs.

The evidence is there!
What do you think the OP is all about?

complete refusal to look at the evidence objectively. So be it.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Mystery of the Mammoth and the Buttercups | Geophysical Institute :


“In the early part of this century the famous Beresovka mammoth carcass was discovered in Siberia. Nearly intact, the animal was found buried in silty gravel sitting in the upright position. The mammoth had a broken foreleg, evidently caused by a fall from a nearby cliff 10,000 years ago. The remains of its stomach were intact and there were grasses and buttercups lodged between its teeth. The flesh was still edible, but reportedly not tasty.

No one has ever satisfactorily explained how the Beresovka mammoth and other animals found frozen in the subarctic could have been frozen before being consumed by predators of the time. Some have proposed a sudden change in climate, but this hardly seems a likely explanation. The scientist who uncovered the Beresovka mammoth conjectured that the animal fell into a snow-filled ravine that protected the body until it was perhaps covered by gravel during a summer flood.”

And here’s a feeble attempt to debunk it (all the author does is ramble on & on, providing excepts of documents which really really end up denying his attempt):

Younger Dryas Myth-Busting: Flash-Frozen Mammoths Edition – Watts Up With That?

‘That’s all he has to say’….yep, lol.

mammoth on display:
The Best-Preserved Woolly Mammoth Goes on Display in Japan, But Should We Resurrect it?

Why is that explanation "feeble"? Seriously, look at what you offer in comparison. You claim that it was magic.


And you need to learn how to vet your sources. Watts Up With That is a crank site. It is not a valid source.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

And you need to learn how to vet your sources. Watts Up With That is a crank site. It is not a valid source.

Exactly! That “crank site” was the “feeble attempt” I was talking about!