"Where Did Life Come From?" A 13 Minute Primer For Creationists

[Hockeycowboy]

Links?
There is no evidence of a world flood -- and such a flood would have left a great deal of evidence. There are many geologic, physical and archaeological reasons to doubt the flood.
A ship as described in the Bible would not have been feasible. Gathering, housing and caring for the animals on the ark would not have been feasible -- in so many ways.
Their subsequent dispersal would not have been feasible.
Without an appeal to magic the whole story doesn't hold water.

Do the Scriptures indicate it was an entirely natural incident?

No.

Natural forces were used, but Jehovah was behind the event.

The account tells us:

1)He gave Noah the instructions, which include those ideal ratios, for building the Ark....

2)He brought the animals to Noah (Noah didn’t have to go ‘get’ them, as is often asserted)...

3)He closed the Ark’s door....

4)He caused the waters above to fall, and the underground springwaters below to “break open”....

Should we assume that God ceased any further involvement?
That would be a little naïve.

The Genesis account doesn’t have to tell us everything Jehovah God did in keeping Noah, his family, and the animals safe. Does it?

We have enough facts to rely on....those ideal ratios given to Noah — 30:5:3, which provide stability in rough seas — are good evidence, when other ancient related stories offer ridiculous ark proportions, from circular to cubic structures!


There are many other evidences, much of which scientists fail to explain, because of their refusal to even examine the discoveries in light of the Noachian Deluge.

 

[Skwim]

1)He gave Noah the instructions, which include those ideal ratios, for building the Ark....

Curious, where does it say the ratios were "ideal"? (My bible doesn't mention it)

2)He brought the animals to Noah (Noah didn’t have to go ‘get’ them, as is often asserted)...

Curious, where does it say god brought the animals "to" Noah? (My bible doesn't mention it)

There are many other evidences, much of which scientists fail to explain, because of their refusal to even examine the discoveries in light of the Noachian Deluge.

I assume these would be evidences that are peculiar to science. Those only science would be able to answer, such as ______fill in the blank________________________and_____________fill in the blank_________________ .

.

.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

No. It's best explained by the natural, observable, testable laws and mechanisms.
A creator is a special pleading, and "explains" nothing. Agency isn't explanation.
Why propose a magical agent when familiar, everyday mechanisms are sufficient?

They are not sufficient.

Self-created mindless forces result in chaos, not balance and harmony. Observation and experience reveal this.

And it’s not a magical agent...it’s simply an energy-based agent, an intelligent one, which created the Laws governing the universe and the life in it.

But I suppose you’ll continue believing that something originated from nothing.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

Curious, where does it say the ratios were "ideal"? (My bible doesn't mention it)

(If the Bible said it, would that be sufficient? Not to you!)

Are you saying they aren’t ideal?

The history of ship-building...
Many boats are built w these proportions.

Curious, where does it say god brought the animals to Noah? (My bible doesn't mention it)

Grief!
Genesis 6:20....
(God told Noah, the animals “will come to you”.)

I assume these would be evidences that are peculiar to science. Those only science would be able to answer, such as ______fill in the blank________________________and_____________fill in the blank_________________ .

That’s the point...science has no answer for many of them, currently. The Pleistocene extinctions, for one..
Many aspects of geology, for others.

 

[Skwim]

(If the Bible said it, would that be sufficient? Not to you!)

Are you saying they aren’t ideal?

I have no idea if they're ideal or not.

i·de·al
/īˈdē(ə)l/
adjective
adjective: ideal
1.satisfying one's conception of what is perfect; most suitable.
​

That they supposedly worked in the story is evident by the fact the ark held together and delivered all, or almost all, its cargo alive, but this certainly doesn't mean its dimensions were ideal. This is apparently your own conclusion, and not that of others.

Grief!
Genesis 6:20....
(God told Noah, the animals “will come to you”.)

I agree that some versions of the Bible say the animals "will come to you"---evidently spurred on by god---but some versions do not. For instance:

CEB
From each kind of bird, from each kind of livestock, and from each kind of everything that crawls on the ground—a pair from each will go in with you to stay alive.

CEV
Bring into the boat with you a male and a female of every kind of animal and bird, as well as a male and a female of every reptile. I don’t want them to be destroyed.

GNT
Take into the boat with you a male and a female of every kind of animal and of every kind of bird, in order to keep them alive.

MSG
“But I’m going to establish a covenant with you: You’ll board the ship, and your sons, your wife and your sons’ wives will come on board with you. You are also to take two of each living creature, a male and a female, on board the ship, to preserve their lives with you: two of every species of bird, mammal, and reptile—two of everything so as to preserve their lives along with yours. Also get all the food you’ll need and store it up for you and them.”

WYC
of birds by their kind, and of work beasts in their kind, and of each creeping beast of [the] earth, by their kind; twain and twain of all shall enter with thee, that they may live. (of birds by their kind, and of work beasts by their kind, and of reptiles by their kind; two of each kind shall enter with thee, so that they will continue to live.)

NLV
Two of all the kinds of birds, and animals, and every thing that moves on the ground are to be with you to keep them alive.​

In fact, a couple of versions has god outright telling Noah to bring the animals:

VOICE
Bring all kinds of birds, all sorts of animals, and all varieties of creatures that creep on the ground in pairs, so that each species will survive.

TLB
Bring a pair of every animal—a male and a female—into the boat with you, to keep them alive through the flood. Bring in a pair of each kind of bird and animal and reptile.
​

That’s the point...science has no answer for many of them, currently.

Just what "them" do you have in mind?

The Pleistocene extinctions, for one..
Many aspects of geology, for others.

You said,

"There are many other evidences, much of which scientists fail to explain, because of their refusal to even examine the discoveries in light of the Noachian Deluge."​

So, just how does the Noachian Deluge impact the concept of the Pleistocene extinctions?


.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Do the Scriptures indicate it was an entirely natural incident?

No.

Natural forces were used, but Jehovah was behind the event.

The account tells us:

1)He gave Noah the instructions, which include those ideal ratios, for building the Ark....

2)He brought the animals to Noah (Noah didn’t have to go ‘get’ them, as is often asserted)...

3)He closed the Ark’s door....

4)He caused the waters above to fall, and the underground springwaters below to “break open”....

Should we assume that God ceased any further involvement?
That would be a little naïve.

The Genesis account doesn’t have to tell us everything Jehovah God did in keeping Noah, his family, and the animals safe. Does it?

We have enough facts to rely on....those ideal ratios given to Noah — 30:5:3, which provide stability in rough seas — are good evidence, when other ancient related stories offer ridiculous ark proportions, from circular to cubic structures!


There are many other evidences, much of which scientists fail to explain, because of their refusal to even examine the discoveries in light of the Noachian Deluge.

You require miracle after miracle just to keep the magic boat afloat. And that is the least of your problems. All of the sciences refute the flood.

Why do you claim that God is a liar?

And you have as yet to show that those dimensions were ideal. All you have is vague hand waving.

 

[Subduction Zone]

For those interested in who was the lead researcher of the 1993 Noah’s Ark feasibility and safety study, he is Dr. Seok Won Hong (Not Seon, as is commonly asserted)...his resumé is in the following link:

https://www.isope.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/CV-HONG-SW-2018.pdf

Anyone can see that he is a respected and serious researcher, with valid credentials.

That study has been debunked countless times. Why do you keep referring to it. Please show use a valid source that confirms the lead writers credentials. Strangely no other works of this supposedly well respected lead author can be found on Google Scholar. You might not know this, but to be a "respected and serious researcher" one must publish in peer reviewed journals.

EDIT: Oh, I see you changed your tune a bit. You have changed who you claim was the lead author. Now I can see that author was a contributing author to some articles. But nothing about his credentials. In fact the two articles that I have checked so far he is the only author with zero information about him besides his name:

https://www.researchgate.net/public...is_of_Closed-type_OTEC_Cycle_using_Waste_Heat

https://www.researchgate.net/public...ture_for_a_semi-autonomous_underwater_vehicle

I would say that he still fails as being a reliable resource without knowing exactly what his qualifications are.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Oops, careful about giving out too much information @Hockeycowboy . If the name that you now gave is correct your source is not a source at all. He is a chemist and not an engineer:

https://www.researchgate.net/scientific-contributions/7517332_Seok-Won_Hong

 

[Hockeycowboy]

That they supposedly worked in the story is evident by the fact the ark held together and delivered all, or almost all, its cargo alive, but this certainly doesn't mean its dimensions were ideal. This is apparently your own conclusion, and not that of others.

Read what I said. I did not say ‘dimensions’ did I? I said / wrote, “ratios”...then in response, I wrote “proportions,” relating to those ratios.

I agree that some versions of the Bible say the animals "will come to you"---evidently spurred on by god---but some versions do not.

What matters is not so much how translations or versions word it, but how the oldest Hebrew manuscripts worded it.
Genesis 6:20 Hebrew Text Analysis

Just what "them" do you have in mind?

The Grand Canyon, for one...
How did many of its slot canyons form, since they don’t match the flow of the Colorado?

It goes on & on, worldwide.

So, just how does the Noachian Deluge impact the concept of the Pleistocene extinctions?

It caused (most of) them.

How do you think the 9-million-sq.-miles of permafrost formed, covering much of Siberia, Alaska, and other Arctic areas? With explorers discovering vast amounts of animal remains within it?

 

[Hockeycowboy]

Oops, careful about giving out too much information @Hockeycowboy . If the name that you now gave is correct your source is not a source at all. He is a chemist and not an engineer:

https://www.researchgate.net/scientific-contributions/7517332_Seok-Won_Hong

Seok-Won Hong is not Seok Won Hong. See the difference?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Seok-Won Hong is not Seok Won Hong. See the difference?

Are you sure? Sounds as if you are grasping at straws again. Plus you keep saying that he is well respected . Then why is the only Seok Won Hong that I can find is the chemist? I am not sure but it looks as if he works at the same place. That would be quite the coincidence.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Read what I said. I did not say ‘dimensions’ did I? I said / wrote, “ratios”...then in response, I wrote “proportions,” relating to those ratios.



What matters is not so much how translations or versions word it, but how the oldest Hebrew manuscripts worded it.
Genesis 6:20 Hebrew Text Analysis


The Grand Canyon, for one...
How did many of its slot canyons form, since they don’t match the flow of the Colorado?

It goes on & on, worldwide.



It caused (most of) them.

How do you think the 9-million-sq.-miles of permafrost formed, covering much of Siberia, Alaska, and other Arctic areas? With explorers discovering vast amounts of animal remains within it?

Let's not Gish Gallop. Your refuted claims about the permafrost is more than enough to sink your Ark myth. But thanks for bringing up the tributaries to the Colorado. Though the Colorado has meanders that flood believers cannot explain they are nowhere near as obvious as the incised meanders at Goosenecks State Park. That alone refutes your myth.

 

[Skwim]

Read what I said. I did not say ‘dimensions’ did I? I said / wrote, “ratios”...then in response, I wrote “proportions,” relating to those ratios.

My error. So let me rephrase;

"That they supposedly worked in the story is evident by the fact the ark held together and delivered all, or almost all, its cargo alive, but this certainly doesn't mean its ratios were ideal. This is apparently your own conclusion, and not that of others."​

Now what?

What matters is not so much how translations or versions word it, but how the oldest Hebrew manuscripts worded it.
Genesis 6:20 Hebrew Text Analysis

The Grand Canyon, for one...
How did many of its slot canyons form, since they don’t match the flow of the Colorado?

It goes on & on, worldwide.



It caused (most of) them.

How do you think the 9-million-sq.-miles of permafrost formed, covering much of Siberia, Alaska, and other Arctic areas? With explorers discovering vast amounts of animal remains within it?[/QUOTE]

 

[Skwim]

Read what I said. I did not say ‘dimensions’ did I? I said / wrote, “ratios”...then in response, I wrote “proportions,” relating to those ratios.

My error, let me rephrase:

That they supposedly worked in the story is evident by the fact the ark held together and delivered all, or almost all, its cargo alive, but this certainly doesn't mean its ratios were ideal. This is apparently your own conclusion, and not that of others.
​

Now what do you have to say?

What matters is not so much how translations or versions word it, but how the oldest Hebrew manuscripts worded it.
Genesis 6:20 Hebrew Text Analysis

Really well let's see.

The Grand Canyon, for one...
How did many of its slot canyons form, since they don’t match the flow of the Colorado?

Gee, could it be that the "Colorado" took different paths during its 70-80 million year history?

OF COURSE IT COULD!​

How do you think the 9-million-sq.-miles of permafrost formed, covering much of Siberia, Alaska, and other Arctic areas? With explorers discovering vast amounts of animal remains within it?

See HERE

.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

Let's not Gish Gallop. Your refuted claims about the permafrost is more than enough to sink your Ark myth. But thanks for bringing up the tributaries to the Colorado. Though the Colorado has meanders that flood believers cannot explain they are nowhere near as obvious as the incised meanders at Goosenecks State Park. That alone refutes your myth.

Lol.

That doesn’t refute my answers, neither does your response answer my questions.

Not all canyons were formed by the Noachian Flood. Never said nor implied that.

 

[Valjean]

Do the Scriptures indicate it was an entirely natural incident?
Natural forces were used, but Jehovah was behind the event.

How do we know this?

The account tells us:

1)He gave Noah the instructions, which include those ideal ratios, for building the Ark....
2)He brought the animals to Noah (Noah didn’t have to go ‘get’ them, as is often asserted)...
3)He closed the Ark’s door....
4)He caused the waters above to fall, and the underground springwaters below to “break open”....

But the account hasn't been established as authentic. You could quote the mythology of the Hopis, Inuit, or the Zulus with equal supporting evidence.

The world flood never happened. It's folklore. Such a flood would have left evidence. There is none. Moreover, it's problematic from at least a dozen other reasons.

Should we assume that God ceased any further involvement?
That would be a little naïve.

"God" is not an axiom. Your major premise needs to be verified before you can proceed with your argument.

The Genesis account doesn’t have to tell us everything Jehovah God did in keeping Noah, his family, and the animals safe. Does it?

We have enough facts to rely on....those ideal ratios given to Noah — 30:5:3, which provide stability in rough seas — are good evidence, when other ancient related stories offer ridiculous ark proportions, from circular to cubic structures!


There are many other evidences, much of which scientists fail to explain, because of their refusal to even examine the discoveries in light of the Noachian Deluge.

You're beginning with the premises that Jehovah exists and that the flood happened. Till you can establish these your argument rests on nothing.
I haven't seen any empirical evidence yet.
Establish the reality of the flood and science will be glad to examine it.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

Really well let's see.

Um...they say the same thing. One says “will come to you”, the other says “shall come unto thee.”

I like the first one. You?

Gee, could it be that the "Colorado" took different paths during its 70-80 million year history?

OF COURSE IT COULD!​

Through rock?

And according to some, it’s only been flowing through the Grand Canyon, 6 million years.

Another lack of consensus.

 

[Valjean]

Do the Scriptures indicate it was an entirely natural incident?
Natural forces were used, but Jehovah was behind the event.

How do we know this?

The account tells us:

1)He gave Noah the instructions, which include those ideal ratios, for building the Ark....
2)He brought the animals to Noah (Noah didn’t have to go ‘get’ them, as is often asserted)...
3)He closed the Ark’s door....
4)He caused the waters above to fall, and the underground springwaters below to “break open”....

But the account hasn't been established as authentic. You could quote the mythology of the Hopis, Inuit, or the Zulus with equal supporting evidence.

The world flood never happened. It's folklore. Such a flood would have left evidence. There is none. Moreover, it's problematic from at least a dozen other reasons.

Should we assume that God ceased any further involvement?
That would be a little naïve.

"God" is not an axiom. Your major premise needs to be verified before you can proceed with your argument.

The Genesis account doesn’t have to tell us everything Jehovah God did in keeping Noah, his family, and the animals safe. Does it?

We have enough facts to rely on....those ideal ratios given to Noah — 30:5:3, which provide stability in rough seas — are good evidence, when other ancient related stories offer ridiculous ark proportions, from circular to cubic structures!


There are many other evidences, much of which scientists fail to explain, because of their refusal to even examine the discoveries in light of the Noachian Deluge.

Your beginning with the premises that Jehovah exists and that the flood happened. Till you can establish these your argument rests on nothing.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

Establish the reality of the flood and science will be glad to examine it.

No, sir....that would never happen!

Admitting the Flood occurred, would be tantamount to saying “God exists”....science (well, much of it) couldn’t afford that!

 

[Valjean]

They are not sufficient.

They are. You just don't understand the theory.

Self-created mindless forces result in chaos, not balance and harmony. Observation and experience reveal this.

Wrong and wrong. You're making this up, you're preaching. You don't understand the mechanisms proposed. You're proposing magic by an invisible entity as a reasonable explanation. This is not reasonable, nor is there any supporting evidence besides a book of folklore.

And it’s not a magical agent...it’s simply an energy-based agent, an intelligent one, which created the Laws governing the universe and the life in it.

But I suppose you’ll continue believing that something originated from nothing.

"Energy based agent?" -- a rose by any other name....
You're the one proposing magical poofing, not me. You have no evidence whatever for this agent, and the sort of thing you're proposing has never been witnessed.
Science proposes a commonsense, observable, familiar, testable mechanism.