• 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.

How many of you think there was a World Wide Flood? please vote.

Do you think there was a World Wide Flood?

  • Yes there was.

  • No there was not.

  • I don't know.


Results are only viewable after voting.

FishFace

Senior Veteran
Jan 12, 2007
4,535
169
36
✟20,630.00
Faith
Atheist
we did, and found loads of evidence that could not have formed in a flood. The idea of a global flood was falsified over a hundred years ago.

I've yet to see a creationist use the Flood to actually try and properly explain anything except the Grand Canyon, and we all know how good that one was. If the Flood left evidence in the form of the canyon, one wonders how the chalk cliffs of dover formed - metres and metres of rock which is deposited very very slowly...
 
Upvote 0

BananaSlug

Life is an experiment, experience it!
Aug 26, 2005
2,454
106
41
In a House
✟25,782.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
Recent research I've discovered suggest to me that the ancient Hebrews viewed their particular section of the world and that it extended no further.



If you know that they were writing from this point of view, then a massive flood of the Black Sea (as there is evidence for) would in fact be a worldwide flood, from their point of view. They had no concept of "global" because they had no concept of the earth as a globe, so it is our mistake in applying the stories of the bible on a global scale that has rendered it wrong. When it was originally written, and to the people that wrote it, it may very much have been true.
Exactly!!!!!!!! You took the words straight out of my brain!
 
Upvote 0

Yggdrasil

Senior Member
Dec 23, 2005
580
14
37
✟869.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Others
Keep looking.

Believe me, I have. Actually, the lack of evidence for the great flood was one of the major factors as to why I stopped believing in the bible and eventually god. There is no evidence whatsoever for the flood. If you have some I would like to see it?
 
Upvote 0

KitsapGirl

Regular Member
Jul 11, 2007
295
19
53
Bremerton, WA
Visit site
✟23,012.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I voted yes. To deny the flood of Noah is to say that the Bible is inaccurate.

BTW how did so many huge clams die in the closed position (when shellfish die, they open) in various parts of the world that are VERY far from the ocean, ie. Mt Everest?
 
Upvote 0

flatworm

Veteran
Dec 13, 2006
1,394
153
✟24,922.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
BTW how did so many huge clams die in the closed position (when shellfish die, they open) in various parts of the world that are VERY far from the ocean, ie. Mt Everest?

What is now the top of Everest was at one time part of the ocean floor- it's called plate tectonics and it's how mountains like the Himalayas are formed. If all the sedimentary rock we observe today formed during a huge flood, as many creationists contend, there ought to be no sediment whatsoever on the tops of mountains. After all, it has to come from somewhere, and water flows downhill.
 
Upvote 0

Frumious Bandersnatch

Contributor
Mar 4, 2003
6,390
334
79
Visit site
✟30,931.00
Faith
Unitarian
I voted yes. To deny the flood of Noah is to say that the Bible is inaccurate.

BTW how did so many huge clams die in the closed position (when shellfish die, they open) in various parts of the world that are VERY far from the ocean, ie. Mt Everest?
Please, the fossil in (not on) the limestones that comprise Mt Everest were deposited there before the Himalayan mountain were thrust up starting in the late Cretaceous by the collision of the Indian Subcontinent with the Eurasion plate. They have nothing to do with a global flood. Leonardo Da Vinci first realized that fossils in the rocks of mountains were not evidence of the flood of Noah so your supposed flood evidence is more than a little out of date.
 
Upvote 0

Yggdrasil

Senior Member
Dec 23, 2005
580
14
37
✟869.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Others
Science pwns creationism yet again.








I voted yes. To deny the flood of Noah is to say that the Bible is inaccurate.

BTW how did so many huge clams die in the closed position (when shellfish die, they open) in various parts of the world that are VERY far from the ocean, ie. Mt Everest?


The bible is inaccurate.
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,856,045
52,628
Guam
✟5,145,292.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
The problem for the "flood believers" is that not only is there no evidence for a global flood, but there is massive evidence from biology, geology, paleontology and archeology showing that such an event could not have occured and the more science "keeps looking" the more evidence it finds against such a flood.

Why is that my problem, FB?

You biologists, geologists, paleontologists, and archaeologists just interpret the evidence the way you're taught to interpret it.

As I see it, that's your problem --- not mine.
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,856,045
52,628
Guam
✟5,145,292.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
we did, and found loads of evidence that could not have formed in a flood. The idea of a global flood was falsified over a hundred years ago.

Was this falsification unanimous within the scientific community?
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,856,045
52,628
Guam
✟5,145,292.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
The only way for creationism to survive is if you convince christians to stop looking at a very young age.

Or you teach them to interpret the Bible literally --- like Jesus and His followers did.
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,856,045
52,628
Guam
✟5,145,292.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
In other news, the scientific community has embraced a new theory that the moon is made, not of cheese or rock, but of marshmallow. When asked for evidence for this surprising change of heart, a scientist working at the observatory where the theory was first worked out, he said, "Keep looking - we're sure it's true!"

Is this the same scientific community that thought the moon dust was several feet thick, because they thought the moon was much older than it was?

Wanna guess why Neil Armstrong had to jump from the bottom rung of the ladder?
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,856,045
52,628
Guam
✟5,145,292.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
I've yet to see a creationist use the Flood to actually try and properly explain anything except the Grand Canyon, and we all know how good that one was. If the Flood left evidence in the form of the canyon, one wonders how the chalk cliffs of dover formed - metres and metres of rock which is deposited very very slowly...

I don't wonder how anything formed--- it was created.
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,856,045
52,628
Guam
✟5,145,292.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Believe me, I have. Actually, the lack of evidence for the great flood was one of the major factors as to why I stopped believing in the bible and eventually god. There is no evidence whatsoever for the flood. If you have some I would like to see it?

If that's why you stopped believing Yggdrasil, then your belief must have been pretty "shallow" - (pun intended).

Did it ever occur to you that God cleaned up the mess afterwards?
 
Upvote 0

Frumious Bandersnatch

Contributor
Mar 4, 2003
6,390
334
79
Visit site
✟30,931.00
Faith
Unitarian
Why is that my problem, FB?
I suppose it is not your problem because you have decided long ago to ignore the mass of scientific evidence the contradicts your interpretation of the Bible but it is a problem for flood geologists. Your constant repeating of the phrase "keep looking" doen't help you though because the more science looks the more evidence it finds against the global flood.

You biologists, geologists, paleontologists, and archaeologists just interpret the evidence the way you're taught to interpret it.
No, they interpret it the only way that makes any logical sense. Don't forget that the scientists who first falsified the global flood had been taught that it was a real event. Perhaps you should read Glenn Morton's story. He tried hard to interpret the data he collected in the way he had been taught, that is in terms of a global flood, but found it was impossible. The same was true of David Young and several other geologists who were trained as flood believers. It is only recently that there have been a few (very few) geologists who have been sufficiently indocrinated in the flood myth to hold it against the evidence of modern geology.

Perhaps you could also tell us how to interpret biogeography and biodiversity and the fossil record in terms of a global flood. All the attempts I have seen from flood believers so far lead to complete absurdities and I have seen a lot of them.


As I see it, that's your problem --- not mine.
That is because you close you eyes to the multiple falsifications of the global flood. But accepting science over religious dogma does not really cause me any problems.
 
Upvote 0

Frumious Bandersnatch

Contributor
Mar 4, 2003
6,390
334
79
Visit site
✟30,931.00
Faith
Unitarian
Is this the same scientific community that thought the moon dust was several feet thick, because they thought the moon was much older than it was?

Wanna guess why Neil Armstrong had to jump from the bottom rung of the ladder?
Please, the moon dust nonsense was refuted long ago and in fact completely backfires on Young Earth Creationism. BTW if the moon were only 10,000 years old the amount of "moon dust" would be so thin that it would be hard to measure at all.
 
Upvote 0