Upvote
0
-
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
-
CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.
Noah's Ark (2)
- Thread starter HosannaHM
- Start date
- Feb 4, 2006
- 46,773
- 10,977
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Protestant
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Others
Upvote
0
Nathan Poe
Well-Known Member
Let's agree that if the flood occurred it was a supernatural event. That should make us both happy.
As long as we're doing that, let's agree that if the flood occurred, it was the work of a magical English Sheepdog named "Bosko." That should make us all happy.
Upvote
0
- Jan 10, 2010
- 37,281
- 8,501
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Non-Denom
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
If we convert to Nuclear or Solar power for all our needs then it will become the LEAST important....overnight.
Besides, your view that money is everything
is flawed.
We have lack of data about the flood. Not enough data to suggest what effect in may have had on geology.
Biblical flood geology is pure speculative musings.
If your suggesting there is evidence for a local flood only, then present it.
It may not be good enough for any of us to agree on though.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
It is hard to get data on something that didn't happen.
More like pure fantasy.
The evidence is that their could not have been a global flood so if the Biblical story the Hebrews borrowed from the Sumarian myths are based on anything real it was a large local flood.
A small amount of the evidence against a worldwide flood is summarized in this old thread. I think genetic diversity is left out from that list as well as few others but it should give you a general idea of some of the problems with a worldwide flood.
Falsifications of the Worldwide Flood
But the main point is that not only is there no evidence for a global flood, there is massive evidence against it.
Upvote
0
What the heck does this statement mean? If we convert to primarily nuclear energy, we would need more Uranium, which we find using geology. We would still need corundum and diamond, which are found using geology. We would still need all the different metals in use today, which are found using geology. We would still need plastics, asphalt, and paraffins, which are made from petroleum, which is found using geology. We would still need to find water in dry climates. This water is usually underground, and so is found using geology. We would still need to clean up environmental accidents that contaminate groundwater, which requires the use of geology.
The mineral and petroleum resources industries aren't going anywhere.
At what point did I espouse this view? The point I was making is that industries do not use tools that do not work. Old-earth geology is an incredibly effective tool, and its use has lead to some of the most successful companies on Earth. Please don't try to strawman my arguments.
This statement makes the assumption that the flood as recorded in the bible happened, and so is inherently unscientific. The most likely reason that we lack data on the flood is that it didn't happen. And, as I've already pointed out, we have millions of pages of data that disprove the flood, and negative evidence is just as valid, if not more valid, than positive evidence.
My point, as I'm sure you are aware, was that it is logically inconsistent to say that one flood event is local while the other is global, when no indication of extent is given for either.
Upvote
0
Greg1234
In the beginning was El
Do you understand what is meant by a global fire in these?
'Giant asteroid that wiped out dinosaurs from Earth fell in India' - Brahmand.com
The tremendous impact would have ignited global fires, initiated tsunamis, destroyed coastal habitats, produced acid rains, turned seawater acidic, dissolved carbonate-shelled animals and devastated the biosphere. Millions of organisms would have died instantly from the tremendous tremor and the global fire generated from the impact.
NEW EVIDENCE INDICATES GLOBAL FIRESTORM KILLED OFF DINOSAURS | Deseret News
Scientists Wednesday published new evidence to bolster a controversial theory that dinosaurs went extinct because of a global firestorm sparked by the impact of a giant meteorite.
More Confusion At The K-T Boundary
[FONT=Arial,helvetica]
Evidence of a global fire. Soot appears at the K-T boundary at many sites, but where did it come from? Chemical analyses of these soots show an enhanced concentration of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons over soots above and below the boundary. This is strong evidence of pyrolytic action at the K-T boundary; i.e., widespread fires. (Venkatesan, M.I., and Dahl, J.; "Organic Geochemical Evidence for Global Fires at the Cretaceous/Tertiary Boun dary," Nature, March 2, 1989.) Fire could have been initiated by either volcanism or impacts.[/FONT][/QUOTE]
Upvote
0
[/quote]
What, precisely, does this have to do with the model that Oldwiseguy was talking about? Are you unable to stick to the discussion thread?
Upvote
0
Your link doesn't work but it refers to the new claim that there was an impact even bigger than the Chicxulub impact off the west coast of India about 65 million years ago.
India Asteroid??
This is still a bit speculative but it has nothing to do with the Biblical Flood. India Asteroid??
There is also no doubt that the Deccan Traps in India formed between 60 and 68 million years ago and even if they took a million years to flow out and cool it would have put a lot of stress on the earth's environment. This again has nothing to do with the myth of a global flood 4,500 years ago.
I have already pointed out that the fact that widespread fires probably occured after the Chicxulub strike 65 million years ago has nothing at all to do with the myth of a global 4,500 years ago.
#120
You keep repeating this global fire post as if it means something in relation to the global flood. It doesn't.
You keep repeating this global fire post as if it means something in relation to the global flood. It doesn't.
Yes there is evidence that there were fires all over the world 65 million years ago. Other things were going on as well including massive vulcanism in the Decaan. We don't know all the details. It was, after all, 65 million years ago. This evidence is in NO WAY evidence for the alleged global flood of Noah. You seemed to have convinced yourself that it is a a desperate attempt to claim there is evidence for something that is not only unevidence but overwhelmingly falsified.
Upvote
0
I do but I don't think you do. Let me repeat myself since you keep repeating yourself.
I have explained many times that the Chicxulub strike started fires all around the world because of hot material from the ejecta plume. A model of the hot ejecta fall the places fires probably started (wherever the ejecta fall was over land) is below from Here.
You can see that while the fires are all around the globe the entire earth is not on fire. This event did cause mass extinctions, especially of large land animals 65 million years ago but it is not analogous to the mythical global flood which supposedly killed all land breathing life everywhere, that was not on the ark. It did reduce biodiversity but would not have restricted surviving species to only 2 or 6 individuals and it would have left many surviving species scattered around the earth to evolve into new life forms over the 65 million years that have intervened since. Your arguments based on the so-called global fires after the Chicxulub impact are totally bogus and I see no need to address them further.
__________________
Upvote
0
Greg1234
In the beginning was El
You'll get it. By the way, in response to your "which supposedly killed all land breathing life everywhere" this was given repeatedly.I do but I don't think you do. Let me repeat myself since you keep repeating yourself.
I have explained many times that the Chicxulub strike started fires all around the world because of hot material from the ejecta plume. A model of the hot ejecta fall the places fires probably started (wherever the ejecta fall was over land) is below from Here.
You can see that while the fires are all around the globe the entire earth is not on fire. This event did cause mass extinctions, especially of large land animals 65 million years ago but it is not analogous to the mythical global flood which supposedly killed all land breathing life everywhere, that was not on the ark. It did reduce biodiversity but would not have restricted surviving species to only 2 or 6 individuals and it would have left many surviving species scattered around the earth to evolve into new life forms over the 65 million years that have intervened since. Your arguments based on the so-called global fires after the Chicxulub impact are totally bogus and I see no need to address them further.
__________________
Upvote
0
So you are saying the flood of Noah did not kill all life on earth? So Genesis 7:20 - 23 is not literally true?
7:20 Fifteen cubits upward did the waters prevail; and the mountains were covered.
7:21 And all flesh died that moved upon the earth, both of fowl, and of cattle, and of beast, and of every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth, and every man:
7:22 All in whose nostrils was the breath of life, of all that was in the dry land, died.
7:23 And every living substance was destroyed which was upon the face of the ground, both man, and cattle, and the creeping things, and the fowl of the heaven; and they were destroyed from the earth: and Noah only remained alive, and they that were with him in the ark.
In that case it must have been a local flood. There might or might not be evidence of a local flood a few thousand years ago depending on how big it was and where it was. What does anything about the events 65 million years ago have to do with a local flood a few thousand years ago?
Upvote
0
Greg1234
In the beginning was El
You went on about the ejecta plume. That's not what I'm asking. I'm asking whether or not the fire caused by the meteor strike ( the fire in the immediate vicinity of the meteor strike) was local or did it spread and became the cause of the global fire. It's a simple question.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
