- Jun 18, 2006
- 3,856,120
- 52,646
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Republican
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.
The scientific position on a global flood is that there is no evidence to support it, but the lack of evidence does not prevent some from believing in a global flood.
I just watched as short clip of Neil deGrasse Tyson that put things into a different perspective for me.
"Dinosaurs were around for 200 million years before the asteroid struck. And it's only been 65 million years since. So given that fact it's likely that if the asteroid did not strike, they would still be here and we wouldn't"
again, this is not true. many scientists look to the geological record. and see that the flood caused the things we see today. even the grand canyon was caused by the results of the flood.Science doesn't say it happened at any time, just that there is no evidence that it ever happened. As for the biblical date, too much is known about what was happening at that time to fit it in.
Neil Degrasse Tyson talks a load of nonsense ...
what does he base his science on?AKA science.
what does he base his science on?
then how can you claim he based his views on science?I don't know.
I didn't watch the video.
"Many" is a grotesque exaggeration. Even those few who do and also work as professional geologists don't use flood geology models in their professional work (Steve Austin comes to mind as an example.) Professional geologists are paid to find oil, gas and minerals. None of them use flood geology theory, because flood geology theory does not describe the geology of the Earth accurately and is useless for any practical purpose. With respect to a 3rd millennium flood, there is also archaeology to consider, which pretty much eliminates a flood all by itself.again, this is not true. many scientists look to the geological record. and see that the flood caused the things we see today. even the grand canyon was caused by the results of the flood.
actually, all geographical evidence points to a global flood.
again, this is not true. many scientists look to the geological record. and see that the flood caused the things we see today. even the grand canyon was caused by the results of the flood.
ok, You have me here."Many" is a grotesque exaggeration. Even those few who do and also work as professional geologists don't use flood geology models in their professional work (Steve Austin comes to mind as an example.) Professional geologists are paid to find oil, gas and minerals. None of them use flood geology theory, because flood geology theory does not describe the geology of the Earth accurately and is useless for any practical purpose.
When I look at the evidence, I see the apposite to be true.With respect to a 3rd millennium flood, there is also archaeology to consider, which pretty much eliminates a flood all by itself.
Again, this is false..Unfortunately centuries of geological work has continued to provide no evidence for a global flood;
do you believe it was formed by a river still? You do realise they now know that the river would have had to run uphill to do this?Who are these "scientists" that says this? What are their credentials? What journals have they contributed to?
-CryptoLutheran
then how can you claim he based his views on science?
so you do not believe there can be any good science?Because he talks nonsense, according to another poster.
And if he did, it must have been because he was talking science.
Noah's flood may have happened, but not over the whole earth. Several posters have claimed that there is (scientific)? evidence for a such a flood, yet no one has presented any evidence for a global flood.More than that, there is considerable evidence that if there was a global flood, it didn't happen in the 3rd millenium BC.
If there is evidence for a global flood that can be backed up with science, we don't know what it is because no one, including you has shared it.So it didn't happen?
Someone should tell the geologists that, it would be a major contribution to the field.
Unfortunately centuries of geological work has continued to provide no evidence for a global flood;
... but we have drastically improved our understanding of the earth and the geological forces that continue to shape the planet, from plate tectonics to orogeny.
They have found widespread evidence of all these thingsIf a global flood had occurred, scientists would likely find widespread evidence of marine fossils at high elevations across continents, extensive sedimentary rock layers with rapid deposition features, large-scale sorting of fossils across different regions, and potential disruptions in geological sequences, all suggesting a catastrophic inundation event that covered vast areas of the Earth with water.
do you believe it was formed by a river still? You do realise they now know that the river would have had to run uphill to do this?
also. the mini canyon formed when Mt St Helens blew up and formed the mini canyon, lends support of a breakup of a 2 major lakes left after the flood is the most likely cause.
do you believe in the bible? I guess I will ask before I go on..
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?