Another Flood Question

[Tom 1]

Genesis chapter one, which properly interpreted, in the last days before the return of Jesus, shows that God HID His Truth in the scientific discoveries of the last days. Dan 12:4 At that time, God is going to pour out His Spirit (Spirit of Truth) upon "ALL Flesh" Act 2:17 Can you tell us HOW God is going to reveal His Truth to Atheists? We live today at that time.

I´m not sure if passages about the revelation of God´s ´truth´refer to revelations about the process of creation God set in motion. God doesn´t evince much interest in our pursuing this kind of knowledge through his word, certainly it doesn´t appear to be a subject Jesus felt any need to tackle. Not that I´m suggesting there´s anything wrong in pursuing an understanding of just how things played out in practical terms, but surely revelations to come are about Him, not about the process of creation, the extent of the flood etc. While all of that is interesting we only really have speculation, and it is all secondary to the fundamental issue walking in relationship with God.

 

[MyGivenNameIsKeith]

Not so. I support what I write with God's Holy Word. Genesis one is the entire History of God's 6 Days of Creation, including events which are future to our time. Genesis 1:28-31 is prophecy of events which take place AFTER Jesus returns, UNLESS you can tell us WHEN Humans had dominion or rule over viruses and Angels AND when in the past EVERY living creature was a vegetarian as Gen 1:30 states.

You've lost me, I have no idea what you are talking about. I have a huge imagination and can even keep up with little kids when they talk about stuff, so for you to lose me is quite a feat. To be honest, you keep making statements using your own understanding and keep rambling on and on. Make something coherent. And try to use more than just the one verse. Usually "prophecy" (which is of no private interpretation, btw) is supported by other verses because all doctrine is profitable for instruction. Find the rest of the story. Then get back at me. (spirit of truth was the holy ghost-Pentecost btw, the flood of water was the first occurrence of the spirit, Pentecost was the second, fire will be the third)

 

[Jimmy D]

You've lost me, I have no idea what you are talking about. I have a huge imagination and can even keep up with little kids when they talk about stuff, so for you to lose me is quite a feat. To be honest, you keep making statements using your own understanding and keep rambling on and on. Make something coherent. And try to use more than just the one verse. Usually "prophecy" (which is of no private interpretation, btw) is supported by other verses because all doctrine is profitable for instruction. Find the rest of the story. Then get back at me. (spirit of truth was the holy ghost-Pentecost btw, the flood of water was the first occurrence of the spirit, Pentecost was the second, fire will be the third)

Don't worry, none of that stuff makes sense to anyone apart from Aman777. I find it best not to read beyond the first line of his posts or you can get drawn into a game of never ending pigeon chess.

 

[Jimmy D]

You haven’t shown any evidence, that’s why I am asking for you to show me a single solitary one beginning fossilization.

I'm curious to know if the evidence presented to you has led you to revise your opinion?

 

[David_M]

It was globally -10C for 100,000 years.

You seem a little confused (putting it charitably), the graphs you use do not indicate that the temperature was -10C globally. They show that, on average, temperatures were 10C lower globally than today.

So large parts of Africa was not covered in ice and was not that cold.

It was approximately 33.8 degrees colder in Southern Africa during the little ice age, and that only lasted for a few hundred years at the occasional dip to -.6 not -10 for 100,000 years.

No, temperatures in southern Africa were about 1C lower in the Little Ice Age than today, again that graph shows VARIATION in temperature not absolute temperature.

The correct wording you should have used is "occasional dip OF -0.6C"

 

[David_M]

Just admit you were wrong. Everyone can see you were mistaken in your assertion, it's not that important, it has no bearing on the subject of the thread.

You claim that cro magnon were portrayed as ape like. They aren't.

Agreed I am 50 and cro-magnons have always been depicted as very human in appearance, especially when it came to body shape and posture. That depiction goes back to my school days.

 

[David_M]

So Snowball Earth took place circa 650 mya.

Remind me: when did Noah get on his boat?

Of course the important point is that the Snowball Earth was not an entire planet covered by ice to the level of the highest mountains, it was an earth where the temperature was low enough that the surface was permanently under a layer of snow and ice of varying depths.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

-_- dude, same species as us. So, unless said Cro Magnon was dressed the same as actual Cro Magnons did and not like modern people, they wouldn't stand out much. People would notice this individual is rather short, but not much else about them would be comment worthy.

So just another subspecies, oh sorry, race of humans then. Understood, not a separate species...

 

[Justatruthseeker]

It was void (empty) (-922 bohu Strong's) This is not meaning desolate or waste in any sense. This is a misconception based upon the reading from Jeremiah concerning judgment upon the land AFTER sin had been introduced, not before. To fill a cup with water, one tends to need to make an empty cup first. The cup was not made completely filled first, then emptied. It was empty to begin with as the words indicate. Also, Notice each step of creation was seen as "good". The serpent had not even been cursed to the ground yet (which is the fall of him by the way, clearly seen here ), until the fall of man under sin in the garden. That is where he attempted to make himself as God. It is easy to see in this perspective that Satan first appeared as an angel of light at this point and prior to here. Some commentary take the first of Genesis without form and void to indicate the period where the angels fell, which was not so. Otherwise, they would have been cursed by the time the serpent appeared to Eve. The 7 days were "good" in the text. It even says so. God saw that it was good. Sin wasn't even introduced yet. All of creation lived according to the words that God spoke. (Thou shalt not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God. All 7 days, all of creation followed that commandment. They lived by his words. Until the fall in Eden, where the angels and man, both fell out of touch with God.

No, no. The only two places “tohu wa bohu” is used together in the Bible besides the verse in question, both point to a once flourishing condition made desolate and waste. Coupled with the fact of verb usage in verse one which points to completeness. Then the mark of a pause between the first and second verse in the oldest manuscripts, where you were to pause and marvel at the creation that was just finished.

You can’t just ignore the verb usage in verse one because you don’t want to accept it was finished, completed. And “hayah” never means it’s present condition, but the state something became. It didn’t become desolate a void from a state of being desolate and void.

Then we have literal 24 hour days denoted by an evening and a morning. Ahhh, but now suddenly it’s not literal, just figurative days denoted by sunset and sunrise, right? The same evening and morning from day one to day seven. The sun already existed, it was “appointed” on the fourth day to serve as signs for seasons, for planting and growing, so all would understand it was not to be worshipped.

And I suppose you believe lions had herbivore teeth and ate herbs, even if no such skeleton can be found...... and hence your reason for rejecting evolution - for good reason - because no links or graduated chain can be found. So accept your reasoning now....

In the seventh creation, after the sixth destruction, they will indeed, because the seventh is a perfect creation, not just a “good” one.

So animals suffered because of man’s sin? No where is that mentioned in scripture. Man and the earth were cursed, not animals. Thorns and thistles. Toil, not mere picking fruit from trees. And the garden, where it was perfect did not encompass the entire earth. They were cast out of the garden, which remained as it was. It is/was paradise.

And you never bothered to answer why humans resurrected to an immortal perfect life will need to eat from trees to heal them?

The 7 days were “good” as is mentioned, they just were not the perfect creation yet to come....

 

[Justatruthseeker]

Why would I? I was merely offering an example of a catastrophic event / extinction event other than a flood, I don't believe I mentioned dinosaurs. I'm glad you've finally managed to admit you are wrong about something though.



Do be fair you've cited NOTHING apart from your opinion. References to scientific research seems to be lacking in all your posts, I wonder why?

It seems that you are suggesting that because I haven't posted an example of a fossil forming from the last few thousand years that fossilzation can only occur in a worldwide flood. Is that correct? Because it seems like a particularly bizarre and ill thought out claim to make for many reasons....

Firstly, for someone who is so obsessed with scientific defnitions you appear to be ignoring the fact that fossils are defined as over 10,000 years old. A lack of "recent" fossils would in NO WAY impact our understanding of how fossils were formed in the past, and ofcorse, an absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

Of course all that demonstrates that your thought process is extremely lacking, but as I mentioned before, I couldn't be bothered to present any examples of subfossils (there, you've learnt something today) because of the inevitable hand waving and denial you typically exhibit.



I didn't say I couldn't.



Fine, will you drop this ridiculous line of argument if I do?

In 2005, after a hundred years of neglect, a part of the Mare aux Songes swamp was excavated by an international team of researchers (International Dodo Research Project). To prevent malaria, the British had covered the swamp with hard core during their rule over Mauritius, which had to be removed. Many remains were found, including bones of at least 17 dodos in various stages of maturity (though no juveniles), and several bones obviously from the skeleton of one individual bird, which have been preserved in their natural position.[113] These findings were made public in December 2005 in the Naturalis museum in Leiden. 63% of the fossils found in the swamp belonged to turtles of the extinct Cylindraspis genus, and 7.1% belonged to dodos, which had been deposited within several centuries, 4,000 years ago.[114] Subsequent excavations suggested that dodos and other animals became mired in the Mare aux Songes while trying to reach water during a long period of severe drought about 4,200 years ago.

Dodo - Wikipedia

Much of the ‘fossil’ record for lemurs is recent by fossil standards, and so most specimens haven’t become fully fossilized. As a result, lemur paleontology is besprinkled with the term “subfossil,” indicating bones that are really old and belong to extinct animals, but don’t fit the technical definition of fossils. The lemur subfossil record has taught us a lot about the evolutionary history, adaptations, and recently even genetics of this primitive group of primates, as well as about the ecological history of Madagascar.

eFfing #FossilFriday: Subfossil lemurs

Subfossil lemurs are lemurs from Madagascar that are represented by recent (subfossil) remains dating from nearly 26,000 years ago (from the late Pleistocene until the Holocene) to approximately 560 years ago. They include both living and extinct species, although the term more frequently refers to the extinct giant lemurs. The diversity of subfossil lemur communities was greater than that of present-day lemur communities, ranging from as high as 20 or more species per location, compared with 10 to 12 species today. Extinct species are estimated to have ranged in size from slightly over 10 kg (22 lb) to roughly 160 kg (350 lb). Even the subfossil remains of living species are larger and more robust than the skeletal remains of modern specimens. The subfossil sites found around most of the island demonstrate that most giant lemurs had wide distributions and that ranges of living species have contracted significantly since the arrival of humans.

Subfossil lemur - Wikipedia

Madagascar’s subfossil record preserves a diverse community of animals including elephant birds, pygmy hippopotamus, giant lemurs, turtles, crocodiles, bats, rodents, and carnivorans. These fossil accumulations give us a window into the island’s past from 80,000 years ago to a mere few hundred years ago, recording the extinction of some groups and the persistence of others. The crocodylian subfossil record is limited to two taxa, Voay robustus and Crocodylus niloticus, found at sites distributed throughout the island. V. robustus is extinct while C. niloticus is still found on the island today, but whether these two species overlapped temporally, or if Voay was driven to extinction by competing with Crocodylus remains unknown. While their size and presumed behavior was similar to each other, nearly nothing is known about the growth and development of Voay, as the overwhelming majority of fossil specimens represent mature adult individuals. Here we describe a nearly complete juvenile crocodylian specimen from Anjohibe Cave, northwestern Madagascar. The specimen is referred to Crocodylus based on the presence of caviconchal recesses on the medial wall of the maxillae, and to C. niloticus based on the presence of an oval shaped internal choana, lack of rostral ornamentation and a long narrow snout. However, as there are currently no described juvenile specimens of Voay robustus, it is important to recognize that some of the defining characteristics of that genus may have changed through ontogeny. Elements include a nearly complete skull and many postcranial elements (cervical, thoracic, sacral, and caudal vertebrae, pectoral elements, pelvic elements, forelimb and hindlimb elements, osteoderms). Crocodylus niloticus currently inhabits Madagascar but is locally extinct from this particular region; radiometric dating indicates an age of ∼460–310 years before present (BP). This specimen clearly represents a juvenile based on the extremely small size and open sutures/detached neural arches; total body length is estimated to be ∼1.1 m (modern adults of this species range from ∼4–6 m). This fossil represents the only juvenile subfossil crocodylian specimen reported from Madagascar.2013).

A juvenile subfossil crocodylian from Anjohibe Cave, Northwestern Madagascar


A new study by Trevor H. Worthy, Miyess Mitri, Atholl Anderson and colleagues allowed for a new conclusion. After an analysis of the 600 or so subfossil remains of the bird, some of which are more than 5000 years old, it was realized just what kind of bird Sylviornis was. It was not a real megapode as its name suggested, instead being a sort of primitive stem-Galliforme. Thus it lay at the very base of this huge bird family.

There are even clues to the birds’ extinction, and probably the extinction of many of the native New Caledonian fauna. Six years ago members of the same research team of Anderson and Worthy and a few other colleagues published a study about the end of these animals. It was published in the Journal of Pacific Archaeology, and included research material from New Caledonia’s Pindai Cave system. Pindai is one of the richest of the island’s fossil sites and contained the bones of about 45 species of birds. These included kagu, still alive today, species of snipe, owlet-nightjars and of course Sylviornis. Birds were not the only creatures here though. The animals found in Pindai include mice, rats, bats, monitor lizards and even the terrestrial crocodile Mekosuchus, the island’s apex predator. Radiocarbon dating of the fossils told the team that the chronologically youngest remains of the “giant chicken” were about 3000 years old.

The giant chickens of New Caledonia | Earth Archives

I'm curious to know if the evidence presented to you has led you to revise your opinion?

Yes, it has led me to believe you only see what you want to see, and ignore the reality.

“As a result, lemur paleontology is besprinkled with the term “subfossil,” indicating bones that are really old and belong to extinct animals, but don’t fit the technical definition of fossils.”

But there we go again, ignoring scientific definitions.... Oy vey!

 

[Larniavc]

Of course the important point is that the Snowball Earth was not an entire planet covered by ice to the level of the highest mountains, it was an earth where the temperature was low enough that the surface was permanently under a layer of snow and ice of varying depths.

Fair enough.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

You seem a little confused (putting it charitably), the graphs you use do not indicate that the temperature was -10C globally. They show that, on average, temperatures were 10C lower globally than today.

Perhaps you had best look again... I will include one with caption so you can’t misconstrue it again.

It is the same exact scale for global temperatures that is used today.

So to be charitable, I’ll refrain from stating who is confused...

So large parts of Africa was not covered in ice and was not that cold.

Does this tie in with your confusion they were not global temperatures?

No, temperatures in southern Africa were about 1C lower in the Little Ice Age than today, again that graph shows VARIATION in temperature not absolute temperature.

The correct wording you should have used is "occasional dip OF -0.6C"

No, global temperatures. But here, I’ll include one with heading to clear that up too...

Again, the graphs show GLOBAL TEMPERATURES, NOT VARIATIONS IN TEMPERATURES.

But since we are both being charitable, we will mark it up to simple confusion on your part.

Which btw means 14 degrees fareinheight globally, and 32 degrees is freezing.... so being the equator, we will average the temperature to just above freezing. Hence cave dwellers until it warmed enough to leave those caves.... or at least in their confused chronology.....

 

[ruthiesea]

Because you aren’t supposed to know about it, being a mere student. It’s one of those things paleontologist learn about, but never bother to mention to their students because it tends to falsify their theories of dinosaur extinction.

Scientists strive to disprove (invalidate) theories. It is what they do. So why would science stick to an invalid theory that would only lead to further invalid conclusions based on the false theory? As three people can barely keep a secret, how do all of these paleontologists manage to do so?

What about all of the books and papers written by paleontologists for paleontologists? Why would they hide that a theory is false from their fellow scientists? It serves no purpose. You see, (or you don't) that invalidating theories by gathering new information and knowledge is what drives science forward.

By the way, dinosaur foot prints have been found in shale only 16 inches below the iridium layer. However, the lack of numerous fossils in the area within the 3 meters of the line, does not invalidate evolution. The thinking is that perhaps dinosaurs, especially the large ones, were already on their way out gradually rather than because of a sudden event, which only sealed their fate.

As you fail to understand, when evidence is found that nullifies a theory in part, then the theory must be modified to be consistent with the new facts.

So, based on the evidence of your postings, I conclude that you know very little about science, its aims, and its process.

By the way, evolution does not deny the existence of G-d.

 

[Jimmy D]

Yes, it has led me to believe you only see what you want to see, and ignore the reality.

“As a result, lemur paleontology is besprinkled with the term “subfossil,” indicating bones that are really old and belong to extinct animals, but don’t fit the technical definition of fossils.”

But there we go again, ignoring scientific definitions.... Oy vey!

Lol.

How on Earth can you accuse me of ignoring things.

Did my post not include bones that are undergoing fossilisation? Did you you not see the other examples? Did you not see that by definition they need to be over 10000 years old to be classed as fossils?

I’m not that bothered that you are moving the goal posts and ignoring the majority of my post, it’s what I’ve come to expect.

Creationism is enough of a joke already, and your embarrassing antics aren’t really helping your cause.

 

[Jimmy D]

Yes, it has led me to believe you only see what you want to see, and ignore the reality.

“As a result, lemur paleontology is besprinkled with the term “subfossil,” indicating bones that are really old and belong to extinct animals, but don’t fit the technical definition of fossils.”

But there we go again, ignoring scientific definitions.... Oy vey!

Just one more thing....

Didn’t you ask for fossils that are forming, to which I posted


Much of the ‘fossil’ record for lemurs is recent by fossil standards, and so most specimens haven’t become fully fossilized. As a result, lemur paleontology is besprinkled with the term “subfossil,” indicating bones that are really old and belong to extinct animals, but don’t fit the technical definition of fossils

Why did you quote mine my post? isn’t it exactly what you asked for? Of course they aren’t defined as fossils, that would be ignoring the definition of fossils ie over 10000 years old. What a hypocrite.

Isn’t honesty very important in your understanding of Christian values?

 

[Skreeper]

Just one more thing....

Didn’t you ask for fossils that are forming, to which I posted


Much of the ‘fossil’ record for lemurs is recent by fossil standards, and so most specimens haven’t become fully fossilized. As a result, lemur paleontology is besprinkled with the term “subfossil,” indicating bones that are really old and belong to extinct animals, but don’t fit the technical definition of fossils

Why did you quote mine my post? isn’t it exactly what you asked for? Of course they aren’t defined as fossils, that would be ignoring the definition of fossils ie over 10000 years old. What a hypocrite.

Isn’t honesty very important in your understanding of Christian values?

To be honest there really is no point whatsoever in having a discussion with that guy. At least when you talk to AV he doesn't pretend to have any formal education in the relevant sciences. But with "justatruthseeker" it feels like he is actually convinced that he knows more about every scientific field of study than actual scientists. Couple that with the fact that he never supports his claims with any peer-reviewed studies and you have the apex creationist specimen.

 

[Jimmy D]

To be honest there really is no point whatsoever in having a discussion with that guy. At least when you talk to AV he doesn't pretend to have any formal education in the relevant sciences. But with "justatruthseeker" it feels like he is actually convinced that he knows more about every scientific field of study than actual scientists. Couple that with the fact that he never supports his claims with any peer-reviewed studies and you have the apex creationist specimen.

Oh I quite agree, I am well aware that he won’t even consider anything that he perceives as contrary to his views.

The only reason I bother is if nonsense like that goes unaddressed readers who don’t really have much experience or knowledge in these debates might think he has a valid point (however unlikely that might seem!)

 

[Aman777]

Aman777 said: ↑
Not so. I support what I write with God's Holy Word. Genesis one is the entire History of God's 6 Days of Creation, including events which are future to our time. Genesis 1:28-31 is prophecy of events which take place AFTER Jesus returns, UNLESS you can tell us WHEN Humans had dominion or rule over viruses and Angels AND when in the past EVERY living creature was a vegetarian as Gen 1:30 states.

You've lost me, I have no idea what you are talking about. I have a huge imagination and can even keep up with little kids when they talk about stuff, so for you to lose me is quite a feat. To be honest, you keep making statements using your own understanding and keep rambling on and on. Make something coherent. And try to use more than just the one verse. Usually "prophecy" (which is of no private interpretation, btw) is supported by other verses because all doctrine is profitable for instruction. Find the rest of the story. Then get back at me. (spirit of truth was the holy ghost-Pentecost btw, the flood of water was the first occurrence of the spirit, Pentecost was the second, fire will be the third)

Of course. Genesis 1:28 states that Adam/mankind in Hebrew, will be given dominion or rule over EVERY living creature. Gen 1:28 This has NOT happened in History since mankind has NEVER had rule over mosquitoes , viruses or Angels. 1Co 6:3 This happens AFTER Jesus returns to this Earth.

ALL living creatures will also become vegetarians and Bears and Lions will eat straw like the Ox. Isa 11:7 At no time in the past have Bears and Lions been vegetarians. If you don't believe me, then tell us WHEN in the past this event happened? You cannot since the end of the present 6th Day/Age is future. Genesis 1:28-31 at the end of the 6th Day is Prophesy. Amen?

 

[Aman777]

Don't worry, none of that stuff makes sense to anyone apart from Aman777. I find it best not to read beyond the first line of his posts or you can get drawn into a game of never ending pigeon chess.

False, since I support my view with the AGREEMENT of Scripture Science and History. Some, who CANNOT refute me, in ANY way, make false accusations but NONE of them can point out my error. I rack it up to sour grapes from those who cannot support their foolishness with actual evidence. Amen?

 

[Justatruthseeker]

Scientists strive to disprove (invalidate) theories. It is what they do. So why would science stick to an invalid theory that would only lead to further invalid conclusions based on the false theory? As three people can barely keep a secret, how do all of these paleontologists manage to do so?

What about all of the books and papers written by paleontologists for paleontologists? Why would they hide that a theory is false from their fellow scientists? It serves no purpose. You see, (or you don't) that invalidating theories by gathering new information and knowledge is what drives science forward.

By the way, dinosaur foot prints have been found in shale only 16 inches below the iridium layer. However, the lack of numerous fossils in the area within the 3 meters of the line, does not invalidate evolution. The thinking is that perhaps dinosaurs, especially the large ones, were already on their way out gradually rather than because of a sudden event, which only sealed their fate.

As you fail to understand, when evidence is found that nullifies a theory in part, then the theory must be modified to be consistent with the new facts.

So, based on the evidence of your postings, I conclude that you know very little about science, its aims, and its process.

By the way, evolution does not deny the existence of G-d.

Who said anything about it being a secret planned cover up?

For centuries they made epicycles upon epicycles to support what they truly believed to be reality, that the earth was the center of the solar system.

You confuse people’s unwillingness to let go of a theory they believe to be correct, even when it’s not, as an intentional planned cover up. Potolomy certainly believed he was correct, and devised brilliant mathmatical stratagems to portray what he believed was correct. He and the other scientists, oh sorry, philosopher’s from which scientists came, all believed wholeheartedly their theory was correct. There was no secret cover up, no intentional deception, just belief in an incorrect theory.

And yet they refused to nullify the ToE, despite not a single common ancestor found. Despite every single fossil remaining the same from the oldest one found for that type to the youngest for that type. Despite mutation after mutation never even being able to create a new form, but instead as observed it occurs when Husky mates with Mastiff. When Asian mates with African. When grizzly mates with polar bear. When ground finch mates with tree finch. On and on and on and on.

Edit: and then you got people preaching phylogenic trees, when a recent discovery and sequencing of its genomes is causing them to have to rewrite the entire phylogenic tree. But you all still can’t see it’s wrong and still believe it’s correct. And this is for the most genetically studied and geologically sought after discoveries of any species in existence. And then you think all your others are correct too.......

Even Darwin allowed for a falsification of his theory, but you won’t allow that either, trivializing and building epicycles upon epicycles to get around those finely graduated chains that have never been found, despite 200+ years of searching for them.....

Error after uncorrected error, epicycles after epicycles is the ToE.

Oh, no, there is no intentional misleading, they fervently believe their theory is correct and continue to build upon the epicycles, all the while refusing to look at and trivializing every falsifying observation.

Just like astronomy today as well, with exotic matter no one knows what it is, and ad-hoc theory added to minimalize the falsifications. Epicycles built upon epicycles, error after uncorrected error.

And I certainly think you believe the theory is correct, just as Potolomy and all the rest of them believed theirs was too. You all just keep refusing to look into the telescope is all......