A global flood.

[rmwilliamsll]

thank for the link
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/09/25/nflood25.xml

one of the big problems with dominant metaphors like the global Noahic flood is that people use it to connect with their audience.

This describes a dam break, like the Washington state scablands flood caused by moving water released from a lake by the rapid erosion of the dam.

Noah could have gone surfing, but he could not have floated on the flood waters for even weeks, let alone a year. the metaphor is interesting in this case but it is not correct.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Thanks for the link.

One of the problems with metaphors, especially ones like the Noahic flood is that they become ways to communicate in shorthand, ways to summarize information and pass it on quickly. That is how the terms Biblical-sytle flood is being used in this article.

It is not a rain.
it is not a deluge over a period of time.
it is a dam break.
it didn't really flood anything, it quickly eroded a barrier.
it really isn't anything like the Noahic flood.
the article just makes the connection in order to connect with the reading audience and use a common metaphor.

the same thing happened with an ice dam in the Northwest US in the Washington badlands.
it sours the floodplain downstream from the dam break and leaves a particular kind of damage, as outlined in the article. the water doesn't stay in the flooded area, it just passes through. The best Noah could have done in this flood is to have had one termendous surfing experience.

This is true. Noah's flood was not a Tsumani like event. The waters rose quite slowly, about one and one third inch per minute; hardly a gullywasher. While the waters would have rushed over flatlands and through narrow spillways it would have crept rather slowly up the sides of hills and mountains, leaving little or evidence of it's passing. Salt deposits, left by evaporating inland catchments areas, are found all over the earth however, and are evidence of even older worldwide flooding by the seas as well.

 

[rmwilliamsll]

Salt deposits, left by evaporating inland catchments areas, are found all over the earth however, and are evidence of even older worldwide flooding by the seas as well.


I remember years ago as a freshman walking through the laboratory buildings and reading the cartoons and personal pieces of paper posted to the doors and walks.

one was:
no matter what the data, there is always someone ready and willing to misinterpret it according to his favorite theory.


salt deposits are:
not evidence of flooding but of evaporation.
flooding washes away and/or puts salt back into solution. it is the process of drying that produces salt....duh!

salt deposits all over the world* are not evidence of a global flood, they are of considerably different ages, are buried at very different depths, have very different compositions etc.

i don't know whether conjectures like this are just casual remarks or symptoms of YECist thinking but they are foolish nonsense.


notes:
all over the world means the flood(s) must have been global. cute but stupid. there are trees all over the world, this is an interesting but useless factoid. What is significant is the kinds of trees, their distribution and their history, not this bare fact that they are all over the world. likewise ancient fossil water creatures exist all over the world. this doesn't imply that the world was totally covered with water either. They are of different ages. just like the salt deposits. but you do get credit for your daily exercises for this speculation, for it is truely a great jump in mislogic.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Salt deposits, left by evaporating inland catchments areas, are found all over the earth however, and are evidence of even older worldwide flooding by the seas as well.


I remember years ago as a freshman walking through the laboratory buildings and reading the cartoons and personal pieces of paper posted to the doors and walks.

one was:
no matter what the data, there is always someone ready and willing to misinterpret it according to his favorite theory.


salt deposits are:
not evidence of flooding but of evaporation.
flooding washes away and/or puts salt back into solution. it is the process of drying that produces salt....duh!

salt deposits all over the world* are not evidence of a global flood, they are of considerably different ages, are buried at very different depths, have very different compositions etc.

i don't know whether conjectures like this are just casual remarks or symptoms of YECist thinking but they are foolish nonsense.


notes:
all over the world means the flood(s) must have been global. cute but stupid. there are trees all over the world, this is an interesting but useless factoid. What is significant is the kinds of trees, their distribution and their history, not this bare fact that they are all over the world. likewise ancient fossil water creatures exist all over the world. this doesn't imply that the world was totally covered with water either. They are of different ages. just like the salt deposits. but you do get credit for your daily exercises for this speculation, for it is truely a great jump in mislogic.

You have a real nasty streak in you. Methinks you take yerself a bit too seriously.

 

[fanofthetruth]

hmm

 

[jeffweeder]

There is a flood of evidence, for this very real event;

Sea originating fossils have been found at high altitudes of every continent.

The oldest known living trees, Bristlecone Pines in California, are about 5000 years old. This would coincide with the recovery of the earth after the flood.


Geologist classify rock formations by the type of rock they contain. A layer of the same type of rock is called a stratum. Many scientist believe that certain types of stratum originated in certain time periods such as the Eocene, Triassic, Jurassic and Cretaceous periods of time. There are many places on the earth where the order of these strata is reversed. Examples of this are the Matterhorn and Mythen peaks in the Alps. The order of the strata has been completely reversed in respect to the earth around it. Though many explanations have been offered for this phenomenon, the catastrophic effects of a flood as described in the Bible is still the best explanation.

Sedimentary deposits cover large parts of the earth. These are the type of deposits that result from movement of water.

An analysis of 30,000 radiocarbon dating results published in the "Radiocarbon" journal shows an unmistakable spike in the death of living things about 5,000 years ago.

Fossils of once living organisms have been found in places not suitable for their habitat:

In Lincoln County, Wyoming fossils have been found of an alligator, deep sea bass, sunfish, crustaceans, and palm leaves. Obviously these would not grow well in Wyoming's climate. It also suggest that at one time Wyoming was covered water. The fossils of the life found in this vicinity are very well preserved indicating a fast burial and preservation.

The Florissant, Colorado fossil beds contain fossilized insects that are preserved remarkably well. In addition, the remains of giant sequoia trees have been found here. The sequoia trees and many of the types of insects do not exist in this region today.

Volcanic rocks are found interbedded with sedimentary rocks of all supposed geologic ages. This correlates with the Biblical implication that the "fountains of the great deep" poured out their contents throughout the flood (Genesis 8:2).

Radiometric dating performed on volcanic rocks from the eruption of Mount St. Helens in 1986 indicated that the rocks were between .34 million years to 2.8 million years old. This suggests that the radiometric dating methods to determine the earth are at the best inaccurate.

The shape of the continents hints that they may have been connected at one time. The fossil records of mountain ranges seem to indicate that the mountains were created by the collision of two continents. It is also noted that earthquakes are caused by movement of continents along fault lines. This supports the theory of plate tectonics. A catastrophe such as a the Biblical flood would create enough force to rearrange continents. In fact a flood of these proportions easily becomes a "best fit" for the geological data that exist today.

Although scientific evidence does exist to support many aspects of the Bible, conclusive evidence may never exist to prove or disprove these events. There are so many variables and aspects of science it is easy to interpret the data in a manner pleasing to your desire. I'm sure that Noah had no way to prove his belief in God's word to him (only his family believed him). But he found enough faith to work for 100 years to build a boat that people said he could not use. Scientific discussions may provide a spark of faith to believe the Bible. But, in reality, the choice of what to believe is based on faith. Some people have faith in science or mankind. Others put their faith in God.

 

[rmwilliamsll]

There is a flood of evidence, for this very real event;

Sea originating fossils have been found at high altitudes of every continent.

--->and they are of very different ages, varying by millions of years. the implication that they are all from a single dated event is a lie.

The oldest known living trees, Bristlecone Pines in California, are about 5000 years old. This would coincide with the recovery of the earth after the flood.

--->and the reconstruction of a complete history of this forest using fallen trees goes back to about 12Kya.



Sedimentary deposits cover large parts of the earth. These are the type of deposits that result from movement of water.

--->and these layers are thousands of feet thick and include layers of animal tracks, burrows and upright trees. demonstrating beyond reasonable doubt that they are not the result of a single flood at all.

An analysis of 30,000 radiocarbon dating results published in the "Radiocarbon" journal shows an unmistakable spike in the death of living things about 5,000 years ago.

--->this is pure BS but i'll ask for references anyhow, i have been wrong in the past and might be here. convince me with the evidence that this is not a lie. First of all, show me where i can read the "Radiocarbon" journal article. i have the journal in the library so i can consult it.
Call # QC798.D3 A48
Title Radiocarbon [electronic resource].

Fossils of once living organisms have been found in places not suitable for their habitat:

--->specific reference, much too general to deal with. besides so what?

In Lincoln County, Wyoming fossils have been found of an alligator, deep sea bass, sunfish, crustaceans, and palm leaves. Obviously these would not grow well in Wyoming's climate. It also suggest that at one time Wyoming was covered water. The fossils of the life found in this vicinity are very well preserved indicating a fast burial and preservation.


Radiometric dating performed on volcanic rocks from the eruption of Mount St. Helens in 1986 indicated that the rocks were between .34 million years to 2.8 million years old. This suggests that the radiometric dating methods to determine the earth are at the best inaccurate.

--->please read:
Radiometric Dating
A Christian Perspective
Dr. Roger C. Wiens
at: http://www.asa3.org/aSA/resources/Wiens.html
and you will find out why this is a false claim.

The shape of the continents hints that they may have been connected at one time. The fossil records of mountain ranges seem to indicate that the mountains were created by the collision of two continents. It is also noted that earthquakes are caused by movement of continents along fault lines. This supports the theory of plate tectonics. A catastrophe such as a the Biblical flood would create enough force to rearrange continents. In fact a flood of these proportions easily becomes a "best fit" for the geological data that exist today.

--->at the same time as this projected earth movement happened due to the flood enough heat would be released from the friction to melt the earth several times over. we have been through this PRATT here with excellent guidance from professional geologists.

Although scientific evidence does exist to support many aspects of the Bible, conclusive evidence may never exist to prove or disprove these events. There are so many variables and aspects of science it is easy to interpret the data in a manner pleasing to your desire. I'm sure that Noah had no way to prove his belief in God's word to him (only his family believed him). But he found enough faith to work for 100 years to build a boat that people said he could not use. Scientific discussions may provide a spark of faith to believe the Bible. But, in reality, the choice of what to believe is based on faith. Some people have faith in science or mankind. Others put their faith in God.


--->i don't have to exercise faith in science, it has sufficient evidence to show it's theories and ideas. the typical false dichotomy either God or science. more lies. most Christians in the world do not find a conflict between their science and their Christian faith, only a few fundamentalists that neither understand the faith properly or science rightly. confusing their literalistic interpretation with the only possibly correct reading of the text. and project their imagitive failure on the rest of us.
sad.

notes:
i am not claiming that the person posting these is a liar for making the claims, i do not know if he/she is aware that they are false or not. The claims themselves are lies and great twist the truth if they have any truthfulness in them at all. Professional YECists who write the books and the websites with these things are held to a higher standard, they ought to know better, it is possible that they are liars. Most of those repeating these lies are not themselves liars but are dupted by those they trust and respect who are at best ignorant and at worst "liars for God" like Hovind.

 

[laptoppop]

I like your phrase "a flood of evidence".

There's lots more evidence than what you mentioned. Its hard to go over it all.

- Interstitial fossils crossing multiple layers
- Basic geological interpretative principles disproven, yet still widely used (Guy Berthault-- http://geology.ref.ac/berthault/)
- continent wide layers requiring huge event to accomplish (mentioned by you already)
- lack of grinding layer for some of the most prominent out of order strata
- huge graveyards of animals thrown violently together
- modern pollen found in supposedly "precambrian" aged strata
- geologic column missing huge sections in most places -- to be expected in a giant heterogenous event like a worldwide flood
On and on.

Far from there being no evidence for the flood - the physical evidence supports a global flood BETTER than any other alternative.

 

[jeffweeder]

--->QUOTE RM
i don't have to exercise faith in science, it has sufficient evidence to show it's theories and ideas.

BAHAHAHA

 

[rmwilliamsll]

BAHAHAHA

and this represents reasoned discussion with the goal of mutual understanding?

 

[rmwilliamsll]

I like your phrase "a flood of evidence".

There's lots more evidence than what you mentioned. Its hard to go over it all.

- Interstitial fossils crossing multiple layers
- Basic geological interpretative principles disproven, yet still widely used (Guy Berthault-- http://geology.ref.ac/berthault/)
- continent wide layers requiring huge event to accomplish (mentioned by you already)
- lack of grinding layer for some of the most prominent out of order strata
- huge graveyards of animals thrown violently together
- modern pollen found in supposedly "precambrian" aged strata
- geologic column missing huge sections in most places -- to be expected in a giant heterogenous event like a worldwide flood
On and on.

Far from there being no evidence for the flood - the physical evidence supports a global flood BETTER than any other alternative.

just look at a few:
Interstitial fossils crossing multiple layers
look up polystrate trees
animal burrow
and animal tracks*
find out that these consist of hundreds of layers, on top of each other making a single flood an impossible solution to their presence.

huge graveyards of animals thrown violently together
and in every case they represent a place where animals congregated over time and died and were buried. not a mixture of creatures from very different times.


but please present the evidence for something like this
- modern pollen found in supposedly "precambrian" aged strata
which would be the news of the decade on all the science news sites i read daily, i must have missed it.

notes:
* Glenn Morton has the most accessible information on this
http://www.asa3.org/archive/ASA/200204/0314.html
for example. he has several excellent pages on all 3 topics.

 

[Adventist Dissident]

find the boat and evidence for Noah and it will solve alot of problems.

Here check this out

The tombs of Noah
http://dialogue.adventist.org/articles/17_3_shea_e.htm



http://dialogue.adventist.org/articles/09_1_shea_e.htmhttp://dialogue.adventist.org/articles/17_3_shea_e.htm

World wide or local flood

 

[jeffweeder]

Here is some of the best evidence.
Heribert-Nilsson, N. (Director of the Swedish Botanical Institute) in the book ‘Synthetische Artbildung’ p. 1194, describing the famous Baltic amber deposits:

‘The insects are of modern types and their geographical distribution can be ascertained. It is then quite astounding to find that they belong to all regions of the earth, not only the paleoarctic region as was to be expected. … The geological and paleobiological facts concerning the layers of amber are impossible to understand unless—the explanation is accepted that they are the result of an allochthonous process, including the whole earth


I have a couple of pages of his book, that i can e-mail to anyone that is interested.

 

[shernren]

Here is some of the best evidence.
Heribert-Nilsson, N. (Director of the Swedish Botanical Institute) in the book ‘Synthetische Artbildung’ p. 1194, describing the famous Baltic amber deposits:

‘The insects are of modern types and their geographical distribution can be ascertained. It is then quite astounding to find that they belong to all regions of the earth, not only the paleoarctic region as was to be expected. … The geological and paleobiological facts concerning the layers of amber are impossible to understand unless—the explanation is accepted that they are the result of an allochthonous process, including the whole earth


I have a couple of pages of his book, that i can e-mail to anyone that is interested.

I have a feeling that something is being misinterpreted here, though I can't say without looking at your source. Anyways, if a Flood predicts that insects found worldwide would be allochthonous, what does it then predict for other life-forms? Why don't we have, say, allochthonous marsupials covering the whole globe?

 

[jeffweeder]

shemren, Do you want me to e-mail apage of his book. If so pm me with address.

 

[laptoppop]

just look at a few:
Interstitial fossils crossing multiple layers
look up polystrate trees
animal burrow
and animal tracks*
find out that these consist of hundreds of layers, on top of each other making a single flood an impossible solution to their presence.

Everything I've seen so far (there are a TON of things I've not seen yet! ) seems more consistent with an encroaching flood than not. For example, tracks. For a track to survive and be fossilized, it needs to be buried reasonably rapidly. For a track to be made in the first place, the ground needs to be soft (for example, mud). This is totally consistent with a slowly encroaching flood, with rain and non-rain times, with mutiple washes as parts of local rivers burst, etc. I have not seen any place where there are supposed to be hundreds of track layers on top of each other -- do you have an example of that, or is it just tracks in the midst of lots of layers? Similarly with burrows - animals would re-burrow soon and often during the early stages of the flood - no problem there. One must consider carefully how the flood began and how the waters would spread through the earth.

huge graveyards of animals thrown violently together
and in every case they represent a place where animals congregated over time and died and were buried. not a mixture of creatures from very different times.

No, not really -- except perhaps the La Brea tar pits. The fossilized "graveyards" show whole ecosystems thrown violently into big piles. I believe even most evolutionary paleontologists believe that they come from localized catastrophes, not multiple gather/burial cycles. The bones are thrown together and mingled, as if the animals all died in soft material at about the same time.

but please present the evidence for something like this
- modern pollen found in supposedly "precambrian" aged strata
which would be the news of the decade on all the science news sites i read daily, i must have missed it.

Google on Hatakai shale pollen and you'll get lots of hits. I've read both the multiple findings of fossils, and the attempted rebuttals. The findings for me are much more persuasive on the "pollen has been found" side -- you'll need to judge for yourself.

Here's one article with a bunch of references to various expeditions / rebuttals:
http://www.creationresearch.org/crsq/articles/36/36_3/plantfossils.html

(interesting sidenote are the creationists that try to reject the evidence because by their interpretative framework the pollen should not exist because they put the flood starting at the cambrian layers - which explains the cambrian explosion neatly)

Another interesting (mined) quote:
"A palynologist friend of mine has written that he finds
modern pine pollen in his cretaceous preparations all the time. " http://www.asa3.org/archive/ASA/199709/0101.html

In context the "friend" used that as evidence of how easy it was to contaminate the samples because "of course" you don't find modern pollen in early layers. We need to be VERY careful about dismissing evidence because we disagree with it!

notes:
* Glenn Morton has the most accessible information on this
http://www.asa3.org/archive/ASA/200204/0314.html
for example. he has several excellent pages on all 3 topics.

I've tried a bit here - I'm getting 404 on many of his links right now - hope it will be fixed later.

 

[rmwilliamsll]

sorry, i should have double checked the secondary links.

GM is at:
http://home.entouch.net/dmd/dmd.htm

here is amber and the flood
http://home.entouch.net/dmd/amber.htm

one on tracks
http://home.entouch.net/dmd/Tracks.htm

here is the one on burrows
http://home.entouch.net/dmd/burrows.htm
http://home.entouch.net/dmd/haymond.htm

 

[laptoppop]

- modern pollen found in supposedly "precambrian" aged strata
which would be the news of the decade on all the science news sites i read daily, i must have missed it.

I thought of one other thing related to this. If you have time, could you search your science news sites to see if they ever mentioned it? If not, I wonder if they just never heard of it, or if they rejected it out of hand -- i.e. bias.

 

[Mallon]

For what it's worth, the supposed Precambrian pollen has LONG been disproven -- even by fellow creationists. The story stems from Burdick's incompetence at decontaminating his rock specimens. He found some modern pollen on the surface of a Precambrian rock and claimed he found Precambrian pollen! The whole story is described at length in Numbers' The Creationists.

 

[laptoppop]

Not true. Read the literature yourself -- extreme measures were taken to avoid contamination. One evolutionist has tried to actually gather samples for testing, but it appears that he used the wrong procedure for reducing the samples, and destroyed any fossilized pollen in the process. Including his tests, pollen has been found 3 out of 4 times. Also, it was not "pollen on the surface", but rather fossilized pollen deep within the sample. The samples were thouroughly scrubbed and cleaned before processing to prevent just such surface contamination.