tumbleweed41
Resident Liberal Hippie
If one dismisses everything that is known about geography, hydrology, anthropology and biology, then a global flood is easy to believe.
-
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!
Noah's Ark
- Thread starter Oryonder
- Start date
gnostic
The Lost One
tumbleweed41 said:
It's not just that they dismiss it, they also make claims that all scientists agree with their scriptures. When ask to provide scientific journals, reports or evidences from one of these many scientists, to support their "claims", they will ignored your requests...as if you didn't ask for evidences.
They take their claims of imaginary scientists supporting their scriptures on blind faith.
outhouse
Atheistically
its beyond ignorance and faith.
They claim it happened, so you ask for a exact date, instantly they are trapped.
You show them that during said date, there was no break in writing in egypt, india and china. and no break in any civilization anywhere in the whole world.
YEC in this modern age are embarrassing humanity.
If you added 4.5 Sextillion liters of fresh water to the ocean ?
1) There is not enough water in the world for this
2) If the Oceans rose above the height of Mt Everest no one could survive the cold and the lack of oxygen.
3) you still have the problem of feeding all the animals (180,000 lbs for the two elephants alone) while on the boat only to have then starve when they got off the boat.
Zoe Doidge
Basically a Goddess
I am not disputing any of the above. But if Noah's Ark did happen, it would need that amount of extra water to cover Mt. Everest.
johnhanks
Well-Known Member
What about land bridges now connecting land masses previously separated by sea? I asked you a few pages ago how you accounted for the appearance of the Isthmus of Panama, but you seem conveniently to have overlooked the question.
Fact is, Pegg, at any one time some parts of the earth's crust are sinking, others rising, and the water redistributes itself accordingly. And in anticipation of your knee-jerk to the effect that this is just so much godless scientists' speculation, the uplift and subsidence are observable and measurable.
Fair enough .. we have solved two (salinity and oxygen) out of the hundred or so problems.
Dan4reason
Facts not Faith
Just because water covers 70% of the surface does not mean that it used to cover 100% of the earth surface because you would have to explain where the water went.
Dan4reason
Facts not Faith
1: What forces created these mountains in a year's time to you? You would have to find evidence in modern mountains that these forces created them quickly. If it was earthquakes we should see large cracks around mountains and the mountains should appear as long shelves not as individual points.
2: Such forces would produce tsunamis many hundred of feet high dooming the ark. A magnitude 9 earthquake in the indian ocean caused the 2004 tsunami in the Indian ocean. Think of what seizmic activity that lifted mountains all around the world miles high would do. Think of what the forces that moved the continents thousands of miles from earth other would do.
3: If Mountains did rise for miles, then they did rise well above the water level during the flood. However it was only later on in the flood story that Noah saw dry land.
Zoe Doidge
Basically a Goddess
If the flood needed to happen under todays conditions the amount of water involved is insane, and would certainly result in the death of every human on the planet no matter how they tried to protect themselves.
If there was less water before the flood (and the amounts were seeing now are therefore a result of the flood), then you have a different problem. Namely that no land (including mountains) could have been higher than the sea level is currently for the story to be true. That kind of change would require enormous amounts of energy, something which simply isnt provided by the weight of the water in the oceans today (average of 36,927 KN per square meter). If the energy needed to raise mountains thousands of meters and move continents away from each other was released over a matter of thousands of years the oceans would simply boil away and wed all be very dead.
Important Note - Unlike the rest of the calculations Ive made, the energy requirement calculations are not my own. They are the work of Donald Wise in this article. It should be obvious to anyone with a brain however that they would be vast.
If there was less water before the flood (and the amounts were seeing now are therefore a result of the flood), then you have a different problem. Namely that no land (including mountains) could have been higher than the sea level is currently for the story to be true. That kind of change would require enormous amounts of energy, something which simply isnt provided by the weight of the water in the oceans today (average of 36,927 KN per square meter). If the energy needed to raise mountains thousands of meters and move continents away from each other was released over a matter of thousands of years the oceans would simply boil away and wed all be very dead.
Important Note - Unlike the rest of the calculations Ive made, the energy requirement calculations are not my own. They are the work of Donald Wise in this article. It should be obvious to anyone with a brain however that they would be vast.
outhouse
Atheistically
I agree, LOL trying to find reality in mythology can be nothing nore then mental masterbation at times lol
camanintx
Well-Known Member
There is a big difference between saying that Tasmania isn't an island and that it wasn't always an island. Try to be more careful.
Flooding is a very common occurance. There is evidence that virtually every place on Earth that is above water was once below it and that every place below water was once above it. But the only way you can claim this is evidence of a global flood is to show that they were all under water at the same time.lol
i was making the point earlier that tasmania was once connected by land...now its separated by ocean. Does that really not compute in peoples minds that the earth just may actually be flooded???
its entertaining none the less.
Now we have to figure out how Noah managed to wrangle up two Polar bears from the Arctic, two Spectacled bears from South America, and two of every other creature from around the planet.
Then we have to figure out how these animals got back home again after the flood.
Call me silly but I reckon it would be a tough go for a Kangaroo to make it back to Australia
You have to think about this in terms of magic. Then it all makes sense.
'kinds'. Noah had to bring two of each 'kind' so two representing the bear family.
We don't know the details but perhaps the kangaroo did not have to make it back but just get there in the first place.
Well .... Aside from the fact that it is impossible, in relative terms, for the Kangaroo to have made it to Noah .. and since Australia was not discovered until the 1600's and even God gave Noah the location of Australia .. it is beyond rediculously absurd for Noah to have made it down under to pick the Kangaroo's up.
And yes .. the roo still has to make it back .. otherwise there would be no roos down under .. nor any other of the animals native to that continent.
What constitutes a 'kind'? Is the concept of 'kind' static?
Pegg
Jehovah our God is One
the bible actually says that there was no rainfall before the flood....it says the earth was watered by a mist
so it is in harmony with science that after the rainfall, the first rainbow appeared because rainbows are formed by the raindrops in the air acting as tiny prisms. Prior to that time, no raindrops would have been in the air.
Last edited:
That's funny. We've got imprints of raindrops, all captured in rock, dating from millions of years ago. Even from before what a lot of creationists claim to be "flood layers".