Creation & EvolutionForum for the discussion of this important topic. This forum is open to non-believers. There is a Christians-only forum in the Christians-only section too.
John: a literal reading (i.o.w. p.e. earth = 6000 years old, etc etc) is something else then an interpretation, don't you agree? See, even you are not studying the bible word for word, but you have your own interpretation of it.
Not to nit-pick, but a literal reading is an interpretation. Any reading is. This particular interpretation happens to be, "yep, it's all literal."
__________________
Don't talk like one of them. You're not! Even if you'd like to be.
To them, you're just a freak, like me! They need you right now, but when they don't, they'll cast you out, like a leper! You see, their morals, their code, it's a bad joke. Dropped at the first sign of trouble. They're only as good as the world allows them to be. I'll show you. When the chips are down, these... these civilized people, they'll eat each other.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
See, I'm not a monster. I'm just ahead of the curve.
The snowball theory was just one possibility, and you are correct about the intense amount of energy that would be generated at the speed and mass. The Bible does not say it was raining snowballs, this was given to show the possibility that the water came from space as well. I am not a physics person so I do not have the technical knowledge behind this, but what would happen if the earth entered a cloud of snow several thousands of miles thick, would that also generate as much net energy while blocking out the sunlight? Could some level of orbital synchronicity eliminate the intensity of energy? It must be possible to account for in some way, we used to drop film from satelites without it burning up.
It was a 100 years before the flood actually came when God told Noah it was on its way. Could there actually be an orbit of snow/ice that would have taken 40 days to travel through that now, after so long a time, would be out of range of our telescopes? I am suggesting that there is a possibility not a probability. I would not hang my hat on any of these possibilities, but before I would toss the Bible away because of the Koala bears, I would not be so quick to discount all of the “possibilities”. And of course God could have just made the rain without any help, but I do not think that is the case as shown in other scriptures regarding floods/destruction.
Are the saline soils of the Western US Flood evidence?
The salt layer is above the crystalline rocks from which soil forms. The salt layer is also not associated with the wind blown soil. So where did the Cretaceous clays get their saline from? Clay is known for its ability to “hold” elements because of its electrical nature, while everything just washes right through sand. Clay will hold onto water longer than other types of soil, it has smaller pores and greater surface area than other soils. So although this is not proof of the flood, it is a possibility that the region of the US west with saline soils may be evidence. How would we know? It would take more resources than I have to determine if there is a relationship with the soil types with saline retention and their source rocks or if the saline was externally deposited. Did the deposition occur during the Cretaceous or after? At one time or another, the whole world was covered by oceans. This is what I mean about further study needs to be conducted. If other younger clay soils in the region were also saline soils it would be a clue, but still not conclusive. In the areas of the US where rainfall is limited the soils are saline, is that true in other areas of the world as well? Is this conclusive evidence? It is doubtful; it would need to be thoroughly studied with an open mind.
Are unique plants Flood evidence?
A few years back some new species of plants were discovered in the mountains of East Tennessee. It was suggested that they came from the time that the glaciers altered the climate and then remained in the higher elevations, their relatives would have died out during the hotter summers in the valleys below. Has anyone every correlated the different species of plants found at elevation which appear no where else in the world? This species of plant was not found in Canada where it would be expected to have been native, based upon other plant types in the vicinity. This again could be a case of possible flood evidence. More study would need to be conducted to determine if it was a unique situation or if other plants all over the world fall into the similar categories. The first areas that would have been able to grow again after the flood would be the mountains. Then the plants would have been distributed through natural means and survived in the areas where they were best suited in the ecosystems.
What evidence would you expect to find from a world wide flood? And could that evidence be explained in some other way as to preclude it from being convincing? What would an ice core show from a world wide flood? Would there have even been a flood at the poles? Perhaps it would have snowed at the poles and at elevation so much as to form the basis of glaciers all over the world instead of raining as it did in the Middle East. These are things I do not know. What is the oldest age of the ice in the glaciers that still exist?
Until I get more answers I will remain satisfied with the Biblical record as is.
I would much rather believe the Bible and be wrong, than to disbelieve the Bible and be wrong. There are two kinds of unbelief in the Bible, unbelief because you do not know enough and unbelief where you have been taught enough to believe and refuse to believe. Being naturally skeptical, I challenge most of what I have been taught, looking for loopholes and other possibilities. I was raised in a church going family, but determined after searching the scriptures that many Christian religions have missed out on the spiritual aspects of life, focusing on the conservative ritualistic approach. But now, having experienced supernatural events (healing and the operation of the manifestations of the spirit) in my own life, I know whom I have believed and am persuaded that God is real. His Word gives understanding to life.
Every detail of the flood is not written, but enough is written to understand that all life that was to be destroyed in the flood was destroyed. Not by a Cruel God who botched creation, but to preserve life that would fulfill the purpose of creation. Is it cruel to throw out the rubbish? Every day we destroy millions of bacterial lives by washing our hands with soap, does that make us evil? It is relative, isn’t it?
The snowball theory was just one possibility, and you are correct about the intense amount of energy that would be generated at the speed and mass. The Bible does not say it was raining snowballs, this was given to show the possibility that the water came from space as well. I am not a physics person so I do not have the technical knowledge behind this, but what would happen if the earth entered a cloud of snow several thousands of miles thick, would that also generate as much net energy while blocking out the sunlight? Could some level of orbital synchronicity eliminate the intensity of energy? It must be possible to account for in some way, we used to drop film from satelites without it burning up.
Do you think the snowflakes has little parachutes? Snow falling from space must still convert its potential energy to kinetic energy so it will end up as steam and not snow. The amount of energy we are talking about is several thousand times what the earth receives from the sun in a year so blocking off sunlight won't help.
It was a 100 years before the flood actually came when God told Noah it was on its way. Could there actually be an orbit of snow/ice that would have taken 40 days to travel through that now, after so long a time, would be out of range of our telescopes? I am suggesting that there is a possibility not a probability. I would not hang my hat on any of these possibilities, but before I would toss the Bible away because of the Koala bears, I would not be so quick to discount all of the "possibilities".
I am not tossing away the Bible because of Koala bears. I am saying the biogeography falsifies your interpretation which claims the flood was worldwide and the conclusion is based on far more than Koala bears.
And of course God could have just made the rain without any help, but I do not think that is the case as shown in other scriptures regarding floods/destruction.
What he poofed the water here and then poofed it away and then poofed away all evidence of the flood? I suppose with enough "poof God did its" you can overcome any potential falsification but that means God is trying to fool us into believing there never was a flood.
Are the saline soils of the Western US Flood evidence?
The salt layer is above the crystalline rocks from which soil forms. The salt layer is also not associated with the wind blown soil. So where did the Cretaceous clays get their saline from? Clay is known for its ability to "hold" elements because of its electrical nature, while everything just washes right through sand. Clay will hold onto water longer than other types of soil, it has smaller pores and greater surface area than other soils. So although this is not proof of the flood, it is a possibility that the region of the US west with saline soils may be evidence. How would we know? It would take more resources than I have to determine if there is a relationship with the soil types with saline retention and their source rocks or if the saline was externally deposited. Did the deposition occur during the Cretaceous or after? At one time or another, the whole world was covered by oceans. This is what I mean about further study needs to be conducted. If other younger clay soils in the region were also saline soils it would be a clue, but still not conclusive. In the areas of the US where rainfall is limited the soils are saline, is that true in other areas of the world as well? Is this conclusive evidence? It is doubtful; it would need to be thoroughly studied with an open mind.
The web page explains the origin of the salts.
Are unique plants Flood evidence?
No but the existance of plants such as Nothophagus species and many other plants that can't survive even short immersion in water falsifies the global flood.
A few years back some new species of plants were discovered in the mountains of East Tennessee. It was suggested that they came from the time that the glaciers altered the climate and then remained in the higher elevations, their relatives would have died out during the hotter summers in the valleys below. Has anyone every correlated the different species of plants found at elevation which appear no where else in the world? This species of plant was not found in Canada where it would be expected to have been native, based upon other plant types in the vicinity. This again could be a case of possible flood evidence.
It is not flood evidence and other plants falsify the flood as I said above.
What evidence would you expect to find from a world wide flood?
1. Very limited biological diversity of life on earth. Many plants could not have survived a worldwide flood and those that did survive and need insect pollination would not have insects to pollinate them since most species of insect could not have survived. The predators that came off the ark would have quickly eaten up all the prey species and then each other. Most of the animals that require mature trees for survival would have quickly died off. There should be few plant species whose seeds can't survive prolonged immersion in water.
2. Very limited genetic diversity of surviving animal life, if there was any surviving animal life. All clean species should show genetic bottlenecks indicating reduction to 7 of each kind and unclean species bottlenecks to two of each kind a few thousand years ago. Humans should have more genetic diveristy than "unclean" animals. This is not what is seen.
3. Those animals that did survive should show a distrubtion pattern consistent will all their ancestors being together in the Middle East a few thousand years ago. This is not at all what is seen.
4. All people should look quite similar if we are all descended from 3 families 5000 years ago that were in turn all descended from only two individuals less than 2000 years before that.
5. We should not see ice cores and lake varves consistent with many thousands of years of continous deposition.
6. Some geological evidence of this flood should be found all over the globe. Smaller floods show up easily. How did the evidence for this massive flood all disappear?
The YEC version of the flood myth leads to a lot of other falsified predictions and I am sure there are other failed predictions for your flood model but those should do for a start.
And could that evidence be explained in some other way as to preclude it from being convincing? What would an ice core show from a world wide flood? Would there have even been a flood at the poles? Perhaps it would have snowed at the poles and at elevation so much as to form the basis of glaciers all over the world instead of raining as it did in the Middle East. These are things I do not know. What is the oldest age of the ice in the glaciers that still exist?
At least several hundred thousand years in Antarctica.
Until I get more answers I will remain satisfied with the Biblical record as is.
It is your interpretation of the record that is in question not the Bible as a spiritual quide.
I would much rather believe the Bible and be wrong, than to disbelieve the Bible and be wrong.
This sounds like Pascal's wager.
There are two kinds of unbelief in the Bible, unbelief because you do not know enough and unbelief where you have been taught enough to believe and refuse to believe. Being naturally skeptical, I challenge most of what I have been taught, looking for loopholes and other possibilities
There goes my poor irony meter blown right off the scale again. You are clearly VERY selective in your scepticism and only challenge that which does not agree with your interpretation of the Bible.
(snip)
Every detail of the flood is not written, but enough is written to understand that all life that was to be destroyed in the flood was destroyed. Not by a Cruel God who botched creation, but to preserve life that would fulfill the purpose of creation. Is it cruel to throw out the rubbish? Every day we destroy millions of bacterial lives by washing our hands with soap, does that make us evil? It is relative, isn’t it?
So we mean no more to God than bacteria? If God didn't botch creation why did He repent Himself of it? You may not think that drowing every man, woman, child and infant and all the animals on earth is cruel but I do. Then again I don't think it ever happened.
Now could we get back to the point of this thead? Could some Young Earth creationist try to explain how it was that animals were going about their daily buisness undisturbed while the same global flood that had just deposited the thousands of feet of sediments they were living on was depositing thousands of feet of further sediments on top of them?
The snowball theory was just one possibility, and you are correct about the intense amount of energy that would be generated at the speed and mass. The Bible does not say it was raining snowballs, this was given to show the possibility that the water came from space as well. I am not a physics person so I do not have the technical knowledge behind this, but what would happen if the earth entered a cloud of snow several thousands of miles thick, would that also generate as much net energy while blocking out the sunlight? Could some level of orbital synchronicity eliminate the intensity of energy? It must be possible to account for in some way, we used to drop film from satelites without it burning up.
So instead of the snowball moving to us, we're now moving towards the snowballs? In anyways, the same amount of energy would be needed.uh... orbital synchronicity? I don't think so.
And dropping satelites into our athmosphere is something entirely diffrent because a) those things have exsessive shielding, b) and is just one per drop (not serveral thousands as you are suggesting), c) satelites can manouver and correct their flightpath a little. esp before reentering.
Could there actually be an orbit of snow/ice that would have taken 40 days to travel through that now, after so long a time, would be out of range of our telescopes?
uh... I don't think that is possible. You're suggesting a field of snowballs that is stationairy *and* suddenly pops out of nowhere on the path of earth>? Not possible.
but before I would toss the Bible away because of the Koala bears, I would not be so quick to discount all of the “possibilities”.
Look because of the flood, or any other story for that matter, can be proven as incorrect doesn't mean that you have to throw your bible away. Think as those guys back then. Do you honestly think that the writer of that time had a good concept of the world? Do you think he thought the world was round? Do you think that when he wrote down "global flood" he had seen the Himalaya? Do you think that Noah knew that the 15 cubits above the mountains of the flood would actually mean 8 km + 15 cubits?
The awnsers to those questions are all "No". The flood story at best was an account for a big disaster that happend back then. People couldn't explain it and saw this as an act of God to punish the wicked people. Hey, people said that here as well in 1953, when there was a big flood in my country. Fact was, that they hadn't been keeping maintance for the dykes around here.
And of course God could have just made the rain without any help, but I do not think that is the case as shown in other scriptures regarding floods/destruction.
Guddunit is the worst explaination ever in my opinion.
I haven't had time to completly study that link yet, but no I don't think so. If there's saline in only that part of the Us, why not everywhere in the Us (if it's explained in the link, then I appologize).
Are unique plants Flood evidence?
A few years back some new species of plants were discovered in the mountains of East Tennessee. It was suggested that they came from the time that the glaciers altered the climate and then remained in the higher elevations, their relatives would have died out during the hotter summers in the valleys below. Has anyone every correlated the different species of plants found at elevation which appear no where else in the world? This species of plant was not found in Canada where it would be expected to have been native, based upon other plant types in the vicinity. This again could be a case of possible flood evidence. More study would need to be conducted to determine if it was a unique situation or if other plants all over the world fall into the similar categories. The first areas that would have been able to grow again after the flood would be the mountains. Then the plants would have been distributed through natural means and survived in the areas where they were best suited in the ecosystems
Source?.
What evidence would you expect to find from a world wide flood?
None because it never happend. If it did happend I expect some damn good explainations on how animals survived, on how plants grew back so quickly, on how the geological record says nothing of this, on how the icerecords say nothing of this, on how there are no traces of said flood.
What would an ice core show from a world wide flood?
huge deposists of debries.
Would there have even been a flood at the poles?
Global = everywhere.
These are things I do not know. What is the oldest age of the ice in the glaciers that still exist?
I linked a while back to vostock's icecores. They go back a few 400.000 years.
I would much rather believe the Bible and be wrong, than to disbelieve the Bible and be wrong.
Do you to think for yourself and to be able to learn about your surroundings, or do you want to accept some book that tells you how it is (AND DONT YOU DARE TO QUESTION IT> OR YOU GO TO HELL)? To me, the choice is easy, but I do think that the Bible can be vieuwed as a good theological book.
So instead of the snowball moving to us, we're now moving towards the snowballs? In anyways, the same amount of energy would be needed.uh... orbital synchronicity? I don't think so. [/size][/font]
And dropping satelites into our athmosphere is something entirely diffrent because a) those things have exsessive shielding, b) and is just one per drop (not serveral thousands as you are suggesting), c) satelites can manouver and correct their flightpath a little. esp before reentering.
Back in the early days of Spy vs. Spy our satelites would eject film cannisters that would be picked up. Sorry I do not have a reference. Orbital synchronicity is much like docking in space. Again I am stretching to reach for possibilities not probabilities, an elliptical orbit for a cloud of snow, not balls of snow but a snow/ice cloud could synch up with the earths elliptical orbit for a period of time while journeying on with its course around the sun. Comets do this and sometimes as you already now hit the earth.
Originally Posted by Mistermystery
I haven't had time to completly study that link yet, but no I don't think so. If there's saline in only that part of the Us, why not everywhere in the Us (if it's explained in the link, then I appologize).
Soil science explained that soils in the eastern US as well as tropical regions are acidic is due to rainfall. While the soils of the midwest-west US are alkaline (Saline).
The story about the plants was in the Knoxville, TN paper in 1994. I do not have a copy, but I do have a good memory of the article. My sister in law is a journalist and thought I would enjoy reading about plants. My wife is in the business of selling plants...
Originally Posted by Mistermystery
Do you to think for yourself and to be able to learn about your surroundings, or do you want to accept some book that tells you how it is (AND DONT YOU DARE TO QUESTION IT> OR YOU GO TO HELL)? To me, the choice is easy, but I do think that the Bible can be viewed as a good theological book.
The scriptures were written as Holy men of God wrote as moved by the Holy Spirit. God spoke to them in terms that they could understand, from that point of view they probably could not conceive of a mountain so tall.
I like the idea of using my senses to gather as much information as possible about the world I live in. The senses have their limits. Regarding things about which my senses cannot determine the truth of, I believe what the Bible says. You would not go to hell for questioning the flood story, there are other things that have crept into the Bible and there may be some of that with the flood story, I do not know.
Rejecting Jesus Christ as your personal Lord, and not believing that God raised him from the dead, now that is a different story altogether. People who do not accept his Lordship will be judged by their works, God is not an ogre. It is an odd concept that some people have that God created all of the wonderful variety of this earth, only to destroy it. He created the world to be inhabited by His people. God had angels who robotically took orders, He wanted children who by their choice would love, honor, and respect Him. The battle between good and evil is where the problem lies. God did not create evil, but He did allow it. You cannot have freedom of choice without a choice between two or more things.
Back in the early days of Spy vs. Spy our satelites would eject film cannisters that would be picked up. Sorry I do not have a reference. Orbital synchronicity is much like docking in space. Again I am stretching to reach for possibilities not probabilities, an elliptical orbit for a cloud of snow, not balls of snow but a snow/ice cloud could synch up with the earths elliptical orbit for a period of time while journeying on with its course around the sun. Comets do this and sometimes as you already now hit the earth.
The potential energy of an object in low earth orbit is not as great as one in outside the orbit of the earth. The film canesters where probably heat shielded and they defininetly had parachutes. Comets that hit the earth usually expected to have velocities of about 50 km/sec. That is much higher than I used in my calculation but simple physics shows that the impact velocity must be at least 11 km/sec. If enough water for any significant global flooding fell to earth from outside of earth's orbit the kinetic energy would cook everything in the air to death many thousands of times over.
Soil science explained that soils in the eastern US as well as tropical regions are acidic is due to rainfall. While the soils of the midwest-west US are alkaline (Saline).
The web page I linked explains where the salt in the soils comes from and it is not evidence of a global flood.
The story about the plants was in the Knoxville, TN paper in 1994. I do not have a copy, but I do have a good memory of the article. My sister in law is a journalist and thought I would enjoy reading about plants. My wife is in the business of selling plants...
Good. Have her put some under water for a year and see how they do.
The scriptures were written as Holy men of God wrote as moved by the Holy Spirit. God spoke to them in terms that they could understand, from that point of view they probably could not conceive of a mountain so tall.
Really. How do you know that God spoke directly to the men who wrote the scriptures? How do you know that they recorded everything exactly right? How do you know that every subsequent recording and translation was perfect? How do you know that a local flood didn't get changed to a global flood by zealous priests trying to get a point across?
I like the idea of using my senses to gather as much information as possible about the world I live in. The senses have their limits. Regarding things about which my senses cannot determine the truth of, I believe what the Bible says. You would not go to hell for questioning the flood story, there are other things that have crept into the Bible and there may be some of that with the flood story, I do not know.
It is a matter of interpretation. The whole world was not taxed as you said. I think this also means that that the whole world was not flooded. I have also read that the word used for earth could mean that local land and not the whole earth but I am hardly and expert on ancient Hebrew. My interpretation is supported by a wide variety of observations and yours is falsified by a wide variety of observations. I'll stick with mine until some very solid evidence against it comes along, which I think highly unlikely, and I feel pretty sure you will stick with yours no matter how much evidence against it you are shown.
Rejecting Jesus Christ as your personal Lord, and not believing that God raised him from the dead, now that is a different story altogether.
And it has nothing to do with believing in a mythical worldwide flood. There are plenty of young earth creationists who are very sure that your interpretation of the age of the earth is wrong. You can't both be right but you can both be wrong and you are.
People who do not accept his Lordship will be judged by their works, God is not an ogre.
Of course not. That's why I don't believe he destroyed the whole world in a fit of pique because his botched creation didn't turn out the way he thought it should. The atrocity of the worldwide flood is your problem since you ascribe this horrible act to God.
It is an odd concept that some people have that God created all of the wonderful variety of this earth, only to destroy it.
I agree that you have an odd concept of God.
He created the world to be inhabited by His people. God had angels who robotically took orders, He wanted children who by their choice would love, honor, and respect Him. The battle between good and evil is where the problem lies. God did not create evil, but He did allow it.
Yes and according to you He not only allowed evil He perpetrated a horribly evil act, drowing the entire earth. This is not to mention all those atrocities He later supposedly ordered His chosen people to commit. On the other hand these could just be origin stories of a bronze age people, meant for spiritual enlightenment and not really reflecting at all on the justice and mercy of God. It is your God that is a monster, not mine. the frumious Bandersnatch
Last edited by Frumious Bandersnatch; 16th May 2004 at 04:09 PM.
Back in the early days of Spy vs. Spy our satelites would eject film cannisters that would be picked up. Sorry I do not have a reference.
That's allright because I adressed that in my previous post: to small, not many and those things are shielded.
Orbital synchronicity is much like docking in space.
Yes, but I don't see how snowballs go from stationairy to turning in some way. and anyways, again , the heat that would be genrated is much. to much even.
Again I am stretching to reach for possibilities not probabilities, an elliptical orbit for a cloud of snow, not balls of snow but a snow/ice cloud could synch up with the earths elliptical orbit for a period of time while journeying on with its course around the sun. Comets do this and sometimes as you already now hit the earth.
Comets don't suddenly change orbits.
Soil science explained that soils in the eastern US as well as tropical regions are acidic is due to rainfall. While the soils of the midwest-west US are alkaline (Saline).
Sorry, still haven't had the time to check it out, but I thrust Fb's link completly.
The scriptures were written as Holy men of God wrote as moved by the Holy Spirit. God spoke to them in terms that they could understand, from that point of view they probably could not conceive of a mountain so tall.
I like the idea of using my senses to gather as much information as possible about the world I live in. The senses have their limits. Regarding things about which my senses cannot determine the truth of, I believe what the Bible says. You would not go to hell for questioning the flood story, there are other things that have crept into the Bible and there may be some of that with the flood story, I do not know.
That's cool. I not necesairy like your last paragraph or agree with it, but as long as you keep thinking and questioning everything, you're gonna be fine.
Linear Mode
