New Creationist theory on how life spread out after the flood.

[nuttypiglet]

A) It did rain before the Flood. The Bible never says that it never rained before the Flood. All it says is that, in the beginning, God watered the Earth with a mist. He did this once. There's nothing to suggest he did this all the time, or that it never rained.

You need to read your Bible more.

B) Even if hadn't, this is irrelevant. We're clearly talking about civilizations that arose AFTER the Flood, because we wouldn't know much about a civilization that lived before.

At the very start of Genesis, God moved upon the face of the waters. Many take this to mean God walked on water on the Earth. God then created a firmament to separate the waters which were above the firmament from the waters below it. Now hang on, think about it. If there was no existing firmament, then the waters above couldn't have been waters. This is because God refers to space as waters. God divided the waters (space) from the waters on the Earth (liquid). Some take this to mean God made a water canopy around the Earth, protecting it from the Sun and this crashed down for the flood. God had not caused it to rain, and nowhere does it say he DID cause it to rain UNTIL the flood.

 

[StormanNorman]

Ancient civilizations all have one thing in common, they seemed to disappear without a trace apart from some ruins. The Sphinx in Egypt shows signs around the base of massive water erosion, yet some scientists still don't accept the evidence. If Egyptians of today were direct ancestors of the Ancient Egyptians, they would know what the pyramids were built for. They haven't got a clue. The inhabitants with advanced knowledge to build those civilizations were all wiped out by God, with a flood.

Nice .... women and children, too?

 

[nuttypiglet]

Then the Noah story is just a retelling of a mundane local flood that was retold in a way that made it grander while glorifying their own people.

Then dinosaurs were all local to a specific area.

 

[nuttypiglet]

No, only 4,500 years ago the oxygen content of the air was the same as now.

It was higher over a hundred million years ago.

Remember you cannot make any scientific claims without scientific evidence. And all of the scientific evidence supports evolution.

Second, there are several reasons why all life would have died. There was no food on the surface of the Earth. There were too many carnivores after the flood. There was not enough genetic diversity for life to continue.


Of course the Ark myth is simply a children's bedtime story. Remember that all of the millions and millions of animals on the Ark were supposed to be supplied air through one window a foot and a half square. That alone should tell you that the story is a fairy tale.

total nonsense, the window was all around the top of the ark. The ark was NOT rectangular in shape and the Ark was NOT built from Gopher wood. The width given for the dimensions was the widest section of the hull, just as we describe vessels today. The Ark was made virtually the same way that Ancient Egyptians built their huge barges, 300ft + in length. They were made of bundles of reeds, soaked in resin, then covered in pitch after assembly. The ends of the ark would have curved up and back, to be fastened to a structure in the middle of the ark. It had huge stones to counter balance it, some of which have been found. Here is a picture of what the ark would have looked like.

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/89809360/ark.JPG

 

[nuttypiglet]

Nice .... women and children, too?

absolutely, their genes were all defiled.

 

[StormanNorman]

absolutely, their genes were all defiled.

Well, I'm beginning to understand your call sign ....

 

[CabVet]

Then dinosaurs were all local to a specific area.

Here is a news flash for you, they didn't all die at the same time.

 

[CabVet]

absolutely, their genes were all defiled.

By what? "Evil"? Evil genes, really?

 

[Davian]

They didn't know it, they said it.

On a lighter note, any flood looks global when you're in the middle of it.

 

[Subduction Zone]

total nonsense, the window was all around the top of the ark. The ark was NOT rectangular in shape and the Ark was NOT built from Gopher wood. The width given for the dimensions was the widest section of the hull, just as we describe vessels today. The Ark was made virtually the same way that Ancient Egyptians built their huge barges, 300ft + in length. They were made of bundles of reeds, soaked in resin, then covered in pitch after assembly. The ends of the ark would have curved up and back, to be fastened to a structure in the middle of the ark. It had huge stones to counter balance it, some of which have been found. Here is a picture of what the ark would have looked like.

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/89809360/ark.JPG

It seems that it depends upon the translation that you choose.

And of course there is the problem of a window all around the Ark before the days of glass would allow quite a bit of water into the Ark. So it is a lose lose situation for you guys. The Ark either was not properly ventilated or not properly protected from the weather.

And of course it does not really matter anyway. There is not way that over 5 miles of water would not leave significant evidence on the surface of the Earth.

Genetically the evidence says there was no flood. Geologically the evidence says there was no flood. Physics says that there was no flood.

So what do you have for evidence of a flood.?

 

[Shemjaza]

much higher than it is now. That's why if you was to create dinosaurs in the jurassic movie fashion today, the dinosaurs would simply suffocate.

Evidence?

 

[nuttypiglet]

Here is a news flash for you, they didn't all die at the same time.

and you can prove that? you was there? It wasn't too long ago science was claiming they were all wiped out by a meteor, 65 million years ago. Now they blame a meteor and volcanic activity. It's make your mind up time.

 

[nuttypiglet]

Evidence?

Well there's plenty to read about it on the internet. Their lungs were too small. T-Rex had small nostrils too, not large enough to take in the amount of oxygen needed today for his size. It's quite an interesting subject when you get into it, try looking at how crocodiles get around the problem.

 

[nuttypiglet]

By what? "Evil"? Evil genes, really?

Haven't you read the bible or the book of Enoch?

 

[nuttypiglet]

No, he doesn't. A blind person can check all of the workings of the apparatus and verify for themselves that it would detect a sun if there really was one. This is true of ALL scientific equipment.



Please cite these measureable effects, and show that they were caused by God.



Because the telescope records photons when pointed at the Sun.



No, it is the result of a scientific experiment that can be run by anyone and verified by anyone.



Both are solved by the same solution.



You have never seen a radiowave, and yet you can use scientific experiments that are testable, repeatable, and verifiable to detect radiowaves. There is no reason why pixels on the screen can not be made for touch instead of sight.



Do you know what sight is? Sight is the effect of photons striking your retina.

Try describing colours to a blind person. Persuade them there are different colours and what they look like.

 

[CabVet]

and you can prove that? you was there? It wasn't too long ago science was claiming they were all wiped out by a meteor, 65 million years ago. Now they blame a meteor and volcanic activity. It's make your mind up time.

There are other ways to prove things besides "you was there".

 

[CabVet]

Haven't you read the bible or the book of Enoch?

Yes, and it doesn't talk about "evil genes".

 

[lasthero]

Some take this to mean God made a water canopy around the Earth, protecting it from the Sun and this crashed down for the flood.

Those people are idiots. There's absolutely no reason to think there was ever a water canopy above the Earth, and a myriad of reasons to think there wasn't.

God had not caused it to rain, and nowhere does it say he DID cause it to rain UNTIL the flood.

God doesn't need to cause rain. Rain happens because of the properties of water. It couldn't not rain, unless God stopped it for some strange reason.

 

[Mr Strawberry]

Those people are idiots. There's absolutely no reason to think there was ever a water canopy above the Earth, and a myriad of reasons to think there wasn't.

Probably more diplomatic to call them ignorant rather than idiots, but I basically agree.

God doesn't need to cause rain. Rain happens because of the properties of water. It couldn't not rain, unless God stopped it for some strange reason.

The problems created by insisting there was no rain are rather serious, although I doubt any creationist who advocates 'no rain' is sufficiently aware of how the world works for it to bother them.

 

[lasthero]

And wait a minute.

God created a water shield to protect Earth from the Sun... that he himself created.


What?