Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
Can you find a non-woo site that supports this claim? That does not appear to be a very reliable source.
-
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!
For Christians. Was the flood real or just a myth?
- Thread starter Deeje
- Start date
Can you find a non-woo site that supports this claim? That does not appear to be a very reliable source.
Appreciate your input...however, the evidence for a global Flood is nearly overwhelming!
But unfortunately, despite all the paranormal episodes that many people endure and experience everyday, all evidences that support a supernatural event like the Flood, is interpreted otherwise as separate occurrences, at different times. But to me and many others, all of it examined together while understanding the parameters, provides conclusive proof that the Bible's account is accurate.
Have you ever considered the perfect dimensions given to Noah, in building the Ark? The length being 6x the width, and 10x the height? Modern shipbuilders have concluded that these measurements are ideal, for a vessel such as the Ark, i.e., to provide stability while simply floating with no steering or power!
How did Noah know this, over 4,000 years ago?!
Couple this with more external / indirect evidence..... consider the ancient Chinese character for ship being 8 people in a vessel... it is more support for the Biblical narrative.
Kangaroo Feathers
Yea, it is written in the Book of Cyril...
Um, like what? I'm unaware of ANY evidence for a global flood, let alone "overwhelming" evidence for one.
Faithofchristian
Well-Known Member
Is there evidence for a global.
That all depends on which flood your referring to.
There were two floods that happen.
There's the flood of Noah's,which didn't cover the whole earth.
And there's the flood that covered the whole earth, Which took place before Adam and Eve came into existence.
Kangaroo Feathers
Yea, it is written in the Book of Cyril...
Any evidence for this?
Faithofchristian
Well-Known Member
Sure there's been plenty of evidence provided, but seeing you would not accept it. That's like trying to get a dead horse to drink.
Well seeing below your name saying
( Is America great again yet)
How would you know, when you don't even know when America was great the first time.
Last edited:
Kangaroo Feathers
Yea, it is written in the Book of Cyril...
I'm open to evidence. If you haven't provided any, that's on you. Sorry that 8 people in a boat is the Chinese character meaning "big boat" doesn't convince me. I know the only time there have ever been 8 people in a boat is in the Noah story, but call me skeptical.
Well that's highly relevant *eyeroll*
Last edited:
Faithofchristian
Well-Known Member
Well seeing you just proved my point, You wouldn't accept any evidence if it was provided. All you have to do is look it up. All the evidence is there. All it takes is a little effort on your part to search it out.
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
Oh yes, your typical scam. You have no evidence because there is no such evidence, which leaves you having to make up a disingenuous story to try and cover the simple fact that you have no evidence.
No wonder you're a Trump supporter.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
Seriously, there is no evidence. There are only distortions and lies by ignorant believers.
Which version of the Noah's Ark myth do you believe in? You need to be specific, once you do so I can explain to you why we know that is wrong.
There has been quite a lot of evidence that's already been posted in this thread. You can peruse them.
I'll find them in this thread gradually myself, and direct you to them. Plus, other evidences that haven't been.
Kangaroo Feathers
Yea, it is written in the Book of Cyril...
Please.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
I can guarantee you that all of this supposed evidence has been refuted too. I have a suggestion, pick what you think is the best piece of evidence and people will explain to you why you are wrong.
Apologes
Active Member
I find it really sad that Christians would go to such desperate lengths to defend something that isn't even crucial for their faith in the first place.
I remember when Bill Nye debated Ken Ham and the latter said that no Christian can believe in evolution because once you've rejected the literal 6 day creation period you have to face the fact that there was suffering in the world before humans came to be, as if the theologians and philosophers have been doing nothing for the past 2000 years without accepting Ham's ridiculous narrative...
Really, creationists are mostly just ignorant of the nature of their faith and think it is so vulnerable that the best way they can defend it with is pseudo-science.
I remember when Bill Nye debated Ken Ham and the latter said that no Christian can believe in evolution because once you've rejected the literal 6 day creation period you have to face the fact that there was suffering in the world before humans came to be, as if the theologians and philosophers have been doing nothing for the past 2000 years without accepting Ham's ridiculous narrative...
Really, creationists are mostly just ignorant of the nature of their faith and think it is so vulnerable that the best way they can defend it with is pseudo-science.
I wonder what the ^ above ^ has to do with Adam.
Adam was Not deceived. God did Not set up Adam to be deceived as per 1 Timothy 2:14.
If Adam had Not broken God's Law we would have eternal life as originally offered to Adam before his downfall.
More like Adam deliberately committed suicide to join Eve in her rebellion.
Adam was Not forced, Not deceived, but deliberately made himself into a rebel against his God.
Here's some information from a Dr. Hibben: (PART 1)--
WORLDWIDE MAMMAL MASSACRE
Not many thousands of years ago, a series of bizarre catastrophes turned our earth into an animal
disaster area. It was a massacre of worldwide proportions. Today paleontologists stare at the Fossil
record. They ask themselves, "But why -and HOW?"
by Paul W. Kroll
THE PLACE: Alaska.
THE SUBJECT: A mysterious series of events that wiped out
mammal life in Alaska a few thousand years ago.
THE REPORTER: Frank C. Hibben, well-known professor of archaeology at the University of
New Mexico who visited Alaska in 1941. He surveyed the tragic effects visible in the fossil record.
Later, Dr. Hibben pieced together the facts in his book, The Lost Americans.
Here is a tiny part of the baffling story as he told it.
Animal Disaster Area
"In many places the Alaskan muck blanket is packed with animal bones and debris in trainload
lots."
"Within this mass, frozen solid. lie the twisted parts of animals and trees intermingled with lenses
of ice and layers of peat and mosses. It looks as though in the middle of some catacystimic
catastrophe. . . the whole Alaskan world of living animals and plants was suddenly frozen in mid-
motion in a grim charade" (Frank C. Hibben, The Lost Americans, New York; Apollo Editions,
1961. pp. 90, 91).
Tendons, ligaments, fragments skin and hair, hooves - all are preserved in the muck. In some cases,
portions of animal flesh have been preserved. Bones of mammoths, mastodons, bison, horses,
wolves, bears and lions are hopelessly entangled! One author counts 1,766 jaws and 4,838 meta-
podials from ONE species of bison in a small area near Fairbanks, Alaska, alone.
Archaeologist Hibben saw with his own eyes - and smelled with his own nostrils - the specter of
death. North of Fairbanks, Alaska, he saw bulldozers pushing the melting muck into sluice boxes
for the extraction of gold. As the dozers' blades scooped up the melting gunk, mammoth tusks and
bones "rolled up like shavings before a giant plane." The stench of rotting flesh -tons of it - could
be smelled for miles around.
Hibben and his colleagues walked the pits for days. As they followed the bulldozers they
discovered perfect bison skulls with horns attached, mammoth skin with long black hair and
jumbled masses of bones.
Appalling Death in Alaska
But let Hibben continue his grisly account:
2
"Mammals there were in abundance, dumped in all attitudes of death. Most of them were pulled
apart by some unexplained prehistoric catastrophic disturbance. Legs and torsos and heads and
fragments were found together in piles or scattered separately" ((ibid., p.97).
Logs, twisted trees, branches and stumps were interlaced with the mammal menagerie. The signs of
sudden death were legion.
For example, in the Alaskan muck, stomachs of frozen mammoths have been discovered. These
frozen stomach masses contain the leaves and grasses the animals had just eaten before death
struck. Seemingly, no animal was spared.
"The young lie with the old, foal with dam and calf with cow. Whole herds of animals were
apparently killed together, overcome by some common power" (ibid, p. 170).
Sudden and Unnatural Death
The muck pits of Alaska are filled with evidence of universal and catastrophic death. These animals
simply did not perish by any ordinary means. Multiple thousands of animals in their prime were
obliterated.
On reviewing the evidence before his eyes, Hibben concluded:
"We have gained from the muck pits of the Yukon Valley a picture of QUICK EXTINCTION. The
evidences of violence there are as obvious as in the horror camps of [Nazi] Germany. Such piles of
bodies of animals or men simply do not occur by any ordinary means" (ibid, p 170).
If you want the full impact of what Dr. Hibben surveyed read his book, The Lost Americans.
Why Paleontologists Are Puzzled
It is this type of colossal carnage which gives scientific workers gray hairs. But Alaska's immense
slaughterhouse remains as just one case in point.
Much of North America beyond Alaska's frontiers became an animal disaster area, It has never
recovered from the effects. North America would have made Africa's modern big-game country
look like a children's zoo in those B.C. ("Before Catastrophe") times.
The imperial mammoths, largest known members of the elephant family, thundered across western
North America. In New England, the mastodon, another elephant cousin, roamed the countryside.
Further north, another tusky relative, the woolly mammoth, made his home.
Besides elephants, the woolly rhinoceros, giant ground sloths, giant armadillos, bear-sized beavers,
saber-toothed tigers, camels, antelopes, giant jaguars ALL roamed the countryside.
Then, with alarming suddenness - all these creatures perished. The evidence is still with us in the
rocks for all to see. In varying degrees, it is found on every continent the world over.
Across the vast stretches of Siberia- on the other side of the Arctic ocean, the same type of
monstrous mammal pogrom is quite evident.
Worldwide Destruction Enigma
Africa is populated with an immense number of exotic animals. But fossil evidence shows that
African wildlife is just a shadow of its former self. The same is true for South America. Today,
there are few large animals in that continent. However, the fossil record contains the bones of many
extinct animals with strange-sounding names.
3
Europe and Asia were also struck by this mammalicide. But what was responsible for this mass
zoological homicide? A recent authoritative book on the subject is called Pleistocene Extinctions,
The Search for a Cause.
The book title reveals the truth: scientists are still "searching" for a cause. It is still a mystery. But
why?
Why is the Case of the Colossal Catastrophe still such an enigma? Why has no Sherlock Holmes of
paleontology been able to put together the clues - and deduce the answer?
The basis for the dilemma goes back many, many decades to the time of Charles Darwin. He too
was mystified by this universal mammal butchery. A butchery which gave the coup de grace to so
many species and genera.
Darwin Puzzles Over the Evidence
In his book The Origin of Species Darwin wrote, "The extinction of species has been involved in
the most gratuitous mystery... No one can have marvelled more than I have at the extinction of
species" (Charles Darwin, The Origin of Species, New York: Collier, 1962, p. 341).
Darwin was referring to his five-year cruise as amateur naturalist aboard the H.M.S. Beagle. In his
notes he revealed WHY he and the paleontologists of today are puzzled by the record of
catastrophic death found in the rocks.
"What then, has exterminated so many species and whole genera?" Darwin asked in astonishment.
"The mind at first is irresistibly hurried into the belief of some great catastrophe; but thus to destroy
animals, both large and small, in Southern Patagonia, in Brazil, on the Cordillera of Peru, in North
America up to Behring's [Bering's] Straits, WE MUST SHAKE THE ENTIRE FRAMEWORK OF
THE GLOBE" (Charles Darwin, Journal of Researches into the Natural History and Geology of the
Countries Visited During the Voyage of H. M. S. Beagle Round the World, citation under date of
January 9, 1834).
A Worldwide Catastrophe?
The same thought of violent catastrophe struck Alfred Russel Wallace in the latter 1800's.
Nonscientists today generally do not know very much about Wallace. He, in fact, developed the
idea of biological evolution simultaneously with Darwin. Had Darwin not been persuaded to
publish his ideas when he did, Wallace would have beat him to the punch and published first. As it
turned out, both of them read their papers at the same meeting to avert any possible bad feelings.
Wallace, like Darwin, was a shrewd observer and student of zoology and paleontology. He likewise
was struck by the decimation of mammal life in prehistoric times.
In 1876, Wallace wrote, "We live in a zoologically impoverished world, from which all the
hugest, and fiercest, and strangest forms have recently disappeared…yet it is surely a marvelous
fact, and one that has hardly been sufficiently dwelt upon, this sudden dying out of so many large
Mammalia, not in one place only but over half the land surface of the globe" (Alfred Russel
Wallace, Geographical Distribution of Animals, New York: Hafner, 1962, Vol. 1, p. 150).
Were Wallace alive today, he would probably change the latter portion of his statement to
read, "... over all the land surface of the globe." The effect was worldwide.
Wallace's immediate conclusion was that, "There must have been some physical cause for this great
change; and it must have been a cause capable of acting almost simultaneously over large portions
of the earth's surface"
Last edited:
(PART 2)--
4
What Was the Cause?
Darwin, Wallace and other scientists of that day put forth theories to explain this worldwide
decimation of animal life. But no theory was accepted by all scientists. ALL the theories had weak
points; no one idea accounted for all the phenomena.
Especially puzzling were the fossils of extinct animals in the deep Alaskan muck beds. Equally
perplexing was the Siberian record. The evidence at face value told a story of violent catastrophe.
The record demanded area-wide, continent-wide, indeed WORLDWIDE - and simultaneous ca-
tastrophe.
This baffled the original workers; it still baffles scientists today. Any ideas put forth today are
generally rehashes of theories thought of long ago.
"The mysteries of extinction are so many and so baffling," wrote two archaeologists, "that it is
small wonder no book in English has been written on the subject. Since 1906, when Henry Fairfield
Osborn summed the matter up in his paper of fifty-odd pages, 'The Causes of Extinction of
Mammalia," Eiseley [famed anthropologist] credits only two theories with contributing anything
new to the discussion" (Kenneth Macgowan and Joseph Hester, Early Man in the New World, New
York: Doubleday, 1962, p.202).
Were Ice Ages Responsible?
Earlier workers postulated that Ice Ages were responsible for the mass killings. Not long ago, many
paleontologists became rather cool to this idea. And for good reasons. The death-by-refrigeration
idea simply didn't hold water. It was put into deep freeze storage for the following reasons, neatly
summed up in a book already quoted.
"Horses, camels, sloths, antelopes, all found slim pickings in their former habitat. But what was to
prevent these animals from simply following the retreating ice to find just the type of vegetation
and just the climate they desired? If Newport is cold in the winter, go to Florida. If Washington
becomes hot in the summer, go to Maine" (Frank C. Hibben, The Lost Americans, New York:
Apollo Editions, 1961, p. 176).
This was a good question. And it couldn't be answered.
A typical problem was the glyptodont. Paleontologists regarded him as strictly tropical in
adaptation. But here was the rub. Glaciation could not account for his extinction, unless:
"Unless one is willing to postulate freezing temperatures across the equator, such an explanation
clearly begs the question of their extinction in tropical America" (P. S. Martin and H. E. Wright,
Jr., editors, Pleistocene Extinction, "Bestiary for Pleistocene Biologists," by P. S. Martin and J. E.
Guilday, New Haven: Yale, 1967, p.23).
Giant tortoises, victims of this same mammal destruction, were found throughout the warmer parts
of the world. No paleoclimatologist was prepared to say that in glacial times freezing temperatures
extended through the Caribbean.
It is no wonder paleontologists put the Ice Age theory of extinction into cold storage. It simply
could not explain catastrophe in the tropics.
Equally perplexing was the mysterious extinction of horses in North America. About a decade ago,
eminent paleontologist G. G. Simpson was discussing this problem. It was a real head-scratcher.
When horses were reintroduced into the western hemisphere a few hundred years ago by the
(Pg. 5)
Spaniards, they increased marvelously. If the present climate and terrain is so favorable, what
caused their total extinction in the time just after the Ice Age?
To George Gaylord Simpson, it was one of the most mysterious episodes of animal history."
Wiped Off the Face of the Earth
What signed the horses' death warrant - killing them in droves? For Dr. Simpson, there was no
answer:
"There has been no lack of speculation and a dozen possible explanations have been suggested, but
all of these lack evidence and none is really satisfactory."
After explaining why he, in particular, rejected the Ice Age as the Grim Reaper of horses, Simpson
dejectedly summarized by saying:
"This seems at present one of the situations in which we must be humble and honest and admit that
we simply do not know the answer."
"It must be remembered too that extinction of the horses in the New World is only part of a larger
problem. Many other animals became extinct here at about the same time" (George Gaylord
Simpson, Horses, New York: Doubleday, 1961, pp. 198, 200).
Why did the horse cash in - so violently and quickly? Why did the candle go out on so
many hardy species of mammal life around the world? What caused the mass destruction in
Alaska? How did mammal genocide across the vast stretches of Siberia occur? What caused the last
gasp, the death rattle of land-living creatures in every continent the world over?
Was Man the Killer?
As paleontologists discussed the problem, a new gleam came to many an eye. They saw that the
remains of man - camp fires, burnt bones, arrow-heads - are sometimes associated with animal
remains.
The more they thought about it, the greater became their excitement. "Could man be responsible for
the decimation and extinction of mammal life?" they asked.
It was an intriguing idea.
Extinction occurred almost exclusively on land. It sometimes occurred with definite evidence of
the presence of man. Further, the explanation seemed to be the ONLY ONE left.
Paleontologists published a book, Pleistocene Extinctions, The Search for a Cause, in 1967. The
book was based largely on papers read during the Proceedings of the VII Congress of the In-
ternational Association for Quaternary Research.
From the reports, it was quite evident that the new "overkill" idea was too impotent to be the
answer to the mammal massacre. Although a number of paleontologists accepted the idea, they had
to acknowledge the weakness of the theory
The following statement shows why any such human "overkill" idea is in-adequate:
"We may speculate but we cannot determine how moose, elk, and caribou managed to survive
while horse, ground sloth, and mastodon did not."
"One must acknowledge that within historic time the Bushmen and other primitive hunters at a
Paleolithic level of technology have not exterminated their game resources, certainly not in any
way comparable to the devastation of the late-Pleistocene."
(Pg. 6)
These and other VALID OBJECTIONS to the hypothesis of overkill remain (P. S. Martin,
"Prehistoric Overkill," in Pleistocene Extinctions, The Search for a Cause, P. S. Martin and H. E.
Wright, Jr., editors, New Haven: Yale, 1967, p. 115).
Further, anthropologist Arthur Jelinek in his article "Man's Role in Extinction of Pleistocene
Faunas" for the above-mentioned book, had this to say:
"Throughout the New World one major puzzle exists with regard to linking man with the
extinction. This is the absence of direct evidence of human activity associated with the remains of
extinct animals" (ibid., p. 198).
More staggering were the masses of bone in Siberia and Alaska. Surely, these could not be
explained as the "overkill" effects of man.
The Problem of Siberia
Russian scientist N. K. Vereshchagin was blunt. He simply disagreed that man could be responsible
for the massive piles of animal bones in Siberia.
"The accumulations of mammoth bones and carcasses of mammoth, rhinoceros, and bison found
in frozen ground in Idigirka, Kolyma, and Novosibirsk islands bear no trace of hunting or activity
of primitive man" (ibid., "Primitive Hunters and Pleistocene Extinction in the Soviet Union" p.
338).
That man hunted animals is not in dispute. That he may have "overkilled" in local areas is, of
course, likely. Some fossils would bear this out.
But to accuse man as solely responsible for killing ALL the animals whose fossils are found round
the world is impossible. Even where animal fossils and evidence of man are found together, man is
sometimes one of the fossils! The Death Reaper claimed both man and beast.
A Worldwide Catastrophe
The evidence - globe-wide evidence - seems to demand a WORLDWIDE paroxysm.
"Either some UNIQUE NATURAL CATASTROPHE must have precipitated extinction or else
natural environmental changes had nothing to do with the event" (P. S. Martin, "Prehistoric
Overkill," in Pleistocene Extinctions, P.S. Martin and H. E. Wright, Jr., editors, New Haven: Yale
University Press, 1967, p. 86).
There it is in a nutshell. The type of catastrophe demanded by the evidence would sabotage the
uniformitarian idea that the "present is the key to the past."
In the preface of the same book, P.S. Martin asked:
"If climatic change was responsible, then it must have been a change of a magnitude not known
previously. Are meteorologists prepared to recognize the possibility of a climatic shock wave of
UNPRECEDENTED DIMENSION?"
In fact, "unprecedented" is a weak word. Better phrased is Hibben's explanation:
"Throughout the Alaskan mucks," said this startled scientist, "there is evidence of atmospheric
disturbances of unparalleled violence. Mammoth and bison alike were torn and twisted as though
by a cosmic hand in godly rage" (Frank C. Hibben, The Lost Americans, New York: Apollo
Editions, 1961, p.177).
(PART 3)--
Thought from Pg. 6 continiues:
7
Then it is possible that singular and extraordinary ravages of nature could have delivered the
knockout punch. Climatic shock waves - not seen since - could have delivered the fatal blow,
extinguishing the breath of myriads of land mammals.
The idea, admittedly, may be hard to accept - but it is possible! Are we afraid to think the
unthinkable?
The question becomes: Does the fossil record show a worldwide upheaval of sufficient dimension
to explain the virtual extirpation of life on land?
The answer, of course, is yes.
Catastrophe Across Siberia
Workers who have studied the fossil finds in Siberia are equally astonished by the specter of mass
extinction.
World-known British zoologist Ivan T. Sanderson, discussed the Siberian remains in a popular
magazine article some years ago:
"The greatest riddle. . . is when, why and how did all these assorted creatures, and in such
absolutely countless numbers, get killed, mashed up and frozen into this horrific indecency?" (Ivan
T. Sanderson, "Riddle of the Frozen Giants," Saturday Evening Post, January 16, 1960, p. 82.)
It was Sanderson's conclusion that no previous theory could explain the mammal mess. He
especially emphasized the last meal of the Beresovka mammoth.
Upon the tongue, "as well as between the teeth, were portions of the animal's last meal, which for
some almost incomprehensible reason it had not had time to swallow.
"This meal proved to have been composed of delicate sedges and grasses and - most amazing of all
- FRESH BUTTERCUP FLOWERS. The stomach contained many more quarts of similar material.
This discovery, in one fell swoop, just about demolished all the previous theories about the origin
of these frozen animals and set at naught almost everything that was subsequently put forward. In
fact, it presented a royal flush of new riddles" (ibid., p.82).
In thinking about the vast hordes of bones in Siberia plus analyzing the preserved specimens.
Sanderson was constrained to conjure up a scenario of vast catastrophe.
Earthwide Cataclysm
He concluded his death-by-catastrophe theory on this note:
"There would be forty days and nights of snow in one place, continent-wide floods in
another, and roaring hurricanes, seaquakes and earthquakes bringing on landslides and tidal waves
in others, and many other disturbances" (ibid, p. 83).
This does not mean that all the details of this series of catastrophes followed the "Sanderson
scheme." However, it is quite clear that the catastrophes had to involve elements he mentioned -
and be on the same order of magnitude described. In no other way can one account for the
evidence.
ONLY this type (one may bicker about details) of catastrophe would be able to put an end to
mammal life in the way which explains the record in the earth's surface.
How else does one explain young and old cast about; torn apart and frozen? What other theory
would account for cases of fresh or only partially decayed meat? What about vast masses of
animals - including entire herds? These are all piled together into gulleys, riverbeds, holes. How
(Pg.8)
does one explain the chaotic caldron of mud, shattered trees, huge stones, bits and pieces of
animals?
These are ALL evident in Alaska and across Siberia. No theory of uniformitarianism; no theory
dependent on present conditions explains them. Vast catastrophe is the only answer.
Some Disagree
Other scientists take Sanderson to task for postulating a doomsday-like destruction.
In his article, Pleistocene geologist William Farrand challenged the idea that an unprecedented
catastrophe was needed to account for this menagerie of violent death.
What was his paleontological diagnosis? The animals died due to "natural factors."
After chiding Sanderson concerning the veracity of some facts, Farrand goes on to say, "Adding
insult to injury, Sanderson proceeds to fashion a fantastic climatic catastrophe to explain his
conclusions" (William R. Farrand, "Frozen Mammoths and Modern Geology," Science, Vol. 133,
No. 3455, March 17, 1961, p. 729).
The author may have had reason to criticize some minor points of the article. But Farrand's main
bone of contention was Sanderson's use of unparalleled catastrophic events to solve the Siberian
riddle of mass death. Like many scientists, Farrand felt squeamish before such violence. He would
rather have seen the mammoths cross the bar in a more graceful - uniformitarian - way.
What Price Uniformitarianism?
Farrand's contention reads like this:
"All the evidence now at hand supports the conclusions of previous workers that NO
CATASTROPHIC event was responsible for the death and preservation of the frozen woolly mam-
moths... "
"There appears to be no need to assume the occurrence of a catastrophe ... it is very unlikely that a
catastrophic congelation occurred in Siberia" (ibid., pp. 733, 734).
What Farrand means by "all the evidence" is obscure. Nor is it clear to which "conclusions" of what
"previous workers" he refers to.
Strangely enough, Farrand was silent about the jumbled mass of bones in Alaska. We have already
seen the reaction of one "previous worker" and his "conclusions."
Farrand DID ADMIT, "Sudden death is indicated by the robust condition of the animals and their
full stomachs. Asphyxiation is indicated . . . by the blood vessels of the head of a woolly
rhinoceros.
"The well-preserved specimens, with food in their stomachs and between their teeth, must have
died SUDDENLY probably from asphyxia resulting from drowning in a lake or bog or from being
buried alive by a mudflow or cave-in of a river bank" (ibid., p.734).
Taken to Task by Colleagues
A number of individuals wrote to Farrand - taking issue with his uniformitarian idea. One such
letter was published in a subsequent issue of Science: "These fossils of the Siberian permafrost
present an insuperable difficulty for a theory of slow, gradual geology... no gradualistic process can
result in the preservation of tens of thousands of tusks and whole individuals, even if they died in
the winter. They must have been frozen suddenly" (Harold E. Lippman, "Frozen Mammoths,"
Science, Vol. 137, August 10, 1962, p.449).
The author of the above letter referred to a number of workers, aghast at the heaps of tusks found in
Siberia. For example, in the few decades preceding 1899, one report stated that about 20,000 tusks
had been exported for the ivory trade. These were in perfect condition.
Farrand answered the letter by harking back to his original article. He also hinted at the possibility
of "natural" catastrophe. But in true uniformitarianism form, he denied that any truly extraordinary
series of apocalyptic paroxysms could have occurred.
Why?
Because, said Farrand, "It is not logically sound to postulate a major catastrophe on a scale far
beyond anything we have experienced" (ibid, p.451).
But why? Why should an earth-jarring series of events comparable to Sanderson's be illogical?
Do the fossil facts warrant a conclusion such as Sanderson's? If so, why should it be illogical? Why
must the "present is the key to the past" dogma be so sacrosanct?
If you're referring to the Noachian Flood....
Because Jesus believed it. Matthew 24:37-39.
Grief. He was there!
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
Since Jesus used literary tools at time there is no reason to think that. Though since he probably was just a man of the time that had no special education he probably did. Thanks for the evidence that Jesus was not divine.