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.
A global flood IS verified and accepted by many world scientists, both Christian and secular. They simply differ when it comes to admitting that God caused it.
I have read through this thread a couple times, what is the actual argument that Noah's flood was local again?
if you are proposing a global flood (it seems you are) then that has been falsified already.
The concept of falsifying that a global flood occurred seems strange to me. How was it falsified?
The geological data does not do so, ice core samples do not do so to my knowledge, I really am curious of the proof that you have. A global flood seems totally possible and may have had a causal relationship to climatic changes and possibly may have even affected the tilting of the planet.
A global flood IS verified and accepted by many world scientists, both Christian and secular. They simply differ when it comes to admitting that God caused it.
You appear to be using different definitions of the words 'verified', 'accepted' and 'many' to the rest of us. Is english not your first language?
Seriously, if someone told you that a majority, or even a significant minority of scientists think a global flood happened, they are wrong. Almost no scientists think a global flood happened, the ones that do tend to not be geologists or other appropriate fields, or to be members of organisations like AIG that require their members to sign away their scientific integrity upon entry.
__________________ Greatest Hovind quote of all time, as voted for by members of CF:
"Teaching the pagan religion of evolutionism is a waste of valuable class time and textbook space. It is also one of the reasons American kids don't test as well in science as kids in other parts of the world."
The concept of falsifying that a global flood occurred seems strange to me. How was it falsified?
There is a comprehensive rundown here. Basically, the idea that there was a global flood violates more scientific principles than the whole of Star Trek combined.
__________________ Greatest Hovind quote of all time, as voted for by members of CF:
"Teaching the pagan religion of evolutionism is a waste of valuable class time and textbook space. It is also one of the reasons American kids don't test as well in science as kids in other parts of the world."
The concept of falsifying that a global flood occurred seems strange to me. How was it falsified?
The geological data does not do so, ice core samples do not do so to my knowledge, I really am curious of the proof that you have. A global flood seems totally possible and may have had a causal relationship to climatic changes and possibly may have even affected the tilting of the planet.
Ice core samples do not pose as evidence for a global flood....especially one that supposedly happened only 4400 years ago. The ice sheets have been around for millenia...this shouldn't be so if the Noahic flood story is literally true. Ask any honest, well trained Geologist...the evidence for a global flood just isn't there.
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
A global flood IS verified and accepted by many world scientists, both Christian and secular. They simply differ when it comes to admitting that God caused it.
Ugh, I don't think it's accepted by any real, researching scientists. Fact is, that there is utterly no evidence for it, when there should be entirely massive effects that should be able to be seen in every piece of land in the entire world, but *gasp* there isn't! Look at a nearby cliff - if there was a global flood, it wouldn't look that way.
Seriously, go to a university geology department and ask around, every single person will laugh at the absurdity of even suggesting that they beleive a freaking global flood.
No it's not. Verfied means you can prove that, so where is your evidence?
and accepted by many world scientists, both Christian and secular.
No it's not. There's no increase or decrease in the people that believe that the global flood exsisted, so no dice there. Got any evidence for the number of people who believe in said flood? Because I can't find much about it.
I have read through this thread a couple times, what is the actual argument that Noah's flood was local again?
because the global flood has been falsified? on many fields?
They do. Read point 6 for a small synopsys. Click here if you even want to know more, or click here for a diffrent source. a small aside from that website:
Ice cores contain an abundance of climate information --more so than any other natural recorder of climate such as tree rings or sediment layers. Although their record is short (in geologic terms), it can be highly detailed. An ice core from the right site can contain an uninterrupted, detailed climate record extending back hundreds of thousands of years. This record can include temperature, precipitation , chemistry and gas composition of the lower atmosphere, volcanic eruptions, solar variability, sea-surface productivity and a variety of other climate indicators. It is the simultaneity of these properties recorded in the ice that makes ice cores such a powerful tool in paleoclimate research.
If there would ever be a global flood as large as you propose it would have been noticable like ... something... very noticable.
I really am curious of the proof that you have.
And I am really really really curious what proof you have. Go on. Endulge me. you probably won't but still, go ahead and try me.
The concept of falsifying that a global flood occurred seems strange to me. How was it falsified?
The geological data does not do so, ice core samples do not do so to my knowledge, I really am curious of the proof that you have. A global flood seems totally possible and may have had a causal relationship to climatic changes and possibly may have even affected the tilting of the planet.
primarily it was falsified by finding things that could not occur as a result of a flood. There are a number of these from massive salt deposits, lake varves, bioturbidity, fossil sorting, complex features (oklo phenomenon) and so on. Something like a catastophic global event would leave a global feature, such as the KT boundary where there is a globally matching layer which contains a high concentration of Iridium - a very rare element, and there is none that would match up to a flood.
__________________ MSci MSc ARCS DIC PhD..... yes, I am bragging.
Linear Mode
