Asteroid Strike

[AV1611VET]

Maybe you should attempt to explain yourself better, what are you saying?

I'm saying:

If an asteroid hit the Earth in Mexico, it did it sometime after 4004 BC.

Not "millions of years ago."

And it most certainly didn't wipe out the dinosaurs, as they were on the Ark in 2348 BC.

 

[Strathos]

Why was Noah aboard the Ark for over a year?

The numbers aren't important. They don't change the point of the narrative. But it was a catastrophic flood, way larger than anything in modern times, to the point that many civilizations have preserved it in their folk memory. To imagine a modern equivalent, think of the entire US west coast sinking into the ocean.

Where does the flood account say God gave people a chance to survive? Most didn't take it?

Not in the flood account itself, but in 1 Peter 3:20.

 

[-57]

The numbers aren't important. They don't change the point of the narrative. But it was a catastrophic flood, way larger than anything in modern times, to the point that many civilizations have preserved it in their folk memory. To imagine a modern equivalent, think of the entire US west coast sinking into the ocean.

But that's not what the Bible teaches. The language of the account clearly shows it was a world wide flood.

Not in the flood account itself, but in 1 Peter 3:20.

because they formerly did not obey, when God’s patience waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through water.

Eight persons survived. Why? the flood was world wide.

 

[Ophiolite]

You need to demonstrate the erosion rate ...as well as the other rates are correct. Until you do i'll set false science side.

You made a series of general assertions in regard to the specific technical data provided in the two papers I linked to. It is up to you to provide support for those assertions. I am not going to do your work for you.

I have already noted that you can dispense with some of my points quite readily, but it is important that you do so. I will not make your case for you. That's down to you. Now please stop these avoiding tactics if you wish to be taken seriously.

 

[AV1611VET]

The numbers aren't important.

That's what they told their subordinates at Enron.

They don't change the point of the narrative.

But they do change the way the narrative is interpreted.

But it was a catastrophic flood, way larger than anything in modern times,

Affirmative.

... to the point that many civilizations have preserved it in their folk memory.

No, they didn't. If they did, why are the facts so different?

To imagine a modern equivalent, think of the entire US west coast sinking into the ocean.

I'd rather think of the entire U.S. west coast as being beckoned out of the ocean.

Genesis 1:9 And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so.

 

[AV1611VET]

But that's not what the Bible teaches. The language of the account clearly shows it was a world wide flood.

Language can take a hike.

 

[Jimmy D]

I'm saying:

If an asteroid hit the Earth in Mexico, it did it sometime after 4004 BC.

Not "millions of years ago."

And it most certainly didn't wipe out the dinosaurs, as they were on the Ark in 2348 BC.

But dinosaurs are buried below the detritus left by the asteroid, so how does that work?

 

[Ophiolite]

But dinosaurs are buried below the detritus left by the asteroid, so how does that work?

With great difficulty!

 

[-57]

Language can take a hike.

Try this, read genesis 6-8 and substitute "local region" every time you see the word "earth'.

 

[-57]

But dinosaurs are buried below the detritus left by the asteroid, so how does that work?

How does it not work?

 

[USincognito]

But that's not what the Bible teaches. The language of the account clearly shows it was a world wide flood.

That's nice but the evidence says there was no world wide flood.

Eight persons survived. Why? the flood was world wide.

That's nice but archaeology and gentics shiw the human population of earth was never reduced to 8 people.

 

[USincognito]

There's more to it than that.
There is the assumption the erosion rate has been the same for 50,000 years.
There is the assumption that rock varnishing has remained the same.
There is the assumption cosmic ray have always been the same.

Yeah, that's called science.

Sounds like the 25,000 years age had to be updated to 49,000 years. What's next? 75,000

This is hilarious coming from someone who thinks that science will somehow make a discovery that will shave 4,400,004,000 years off the age of the earth.

 

[-57]

That's nice but the evidence says there was no world wide flood.

That's nice but archaeology and gentics shiw the human population of earth was never reduced to 8 people.

I understand you being an atheist can't agree with anything biblical...but some of the strata seen at the Grand Canyon extend across the country eastward. Now that may not be the complete evidence for a world wide flood but the way the sediment has been deposited shows flow and direction. here is an example using the Tapeats sandstone.

The DNA, genetics of Noahs son's and daughters would have been still pretty much intact. Their heterozygosity would have also been much higher than it is today. God created Adam very good. But the fall has allowed mankinds DNA to de-evolve. Then again you being an atheist can't accept that.

 

[-57]

Yeah, that's called science.



This is hilarious coming from someone who thinks that science will somehow make a discovery that will shave 4,400,004,000 years off the age of the earth.

It's already pretty much happened. The dating techniques have been proven to be in error. As mentioned before your atheist view woun't allow you to accept the truth. As an example biomaterial found inside of dinosaur...and many other fossils...show the fossils can't possibly be 65+ MY's old. If they were that old there would be no biomaterial. BUT THERE IS!
As a second example they often find C14 in coal. If the coal is as old as the old earthers claim why is the C14 still there?

 

[Ophiolite]

It's already pretty much happened. The dating techniques have been proven to be in error. As mentioned before your atheist view woun't allow you to accept the truth. As an example biomaterial found inside of dinosaur...and many other fossils...show the fossils can't possibly be 65+ MY's old. If they were that old there would be no biomaterial. BUT THERE IS!
As a second example they often find C14 in coal. If the coal is as old as the old earthers claim why is the C14 still there?

Still waiting for you stop avoiding dealing directly with the two papers that address the dating of the Barringer Meteor Crater. To address this properly - if you are serious - you will provide peer reviewed citations from reputable journals that support your currently unsupported assertions. Until you do so all your dissembling and equivocation count for nothing.

 

[Jimmy D]

How does it not work?

Well, frankly the whole young earth / global flood / Dinosaurs roaming about in recent times thing is lunacy on a par with flat earthism and is completely untenable from whatever area of study you care to approach it from...

But as you ask, it doesn't work because no dinosaur fossils are found above the detritus left by the meteor, if AV's nonsense is factual we would.

 

[Ophiolite]

Well, frankly the whole young earth / global flood / Dinosaurs roaming about in recent times thing is lunacy on a par with flat earthism and is completely untenable from whatever area of study you care to approach it from...

But as you ask, it doesn't work because no dinosaur fossils are found above the detritus left by the meteor, if AV's nonsense is factual we would.

That's one of those posts where I wish there was an option to punch out a Giant Agree tick. I share your disbelief, frustration, incredulity, etc at the . . . well words fail me, though your suggestion of "lunacy" is a good option. There is a serious world out there and some people simply don't wish to be part of it.

 

[-57]

Well, frankly the whole young earth / global flood / Dinosaurs roaming about in recent times thing is lunacy on a par with flat earthism and is completely untenable from whatever area of study you care to approach it from...

As any atheist would have to say.

But as you ask, it doesn't work because no dinosaur fossils are found above the detritus left by the meteor, if AV's nonsense is factual we would.

Why would we find dinosaurs above the detritus?

 

[-57]

Some interesting facts about the chicuxulub crater..is it really an impact crater?

A little bit more.

 

[lasthero]

Some interesting facts about the chicuxulub crater..is it really an impact crater?

Yes.

But even if it weren’t, it’s far from the only crater on earth and not the biggest, so that doesn’t much help you.