Human Population

[AV1611VET]

Hence your seashells in Kansas.

-- I must be cartographically challenged or something.

 

[AV1611VET]

And Targ comes in with the pwnage. Will AV reply?!

LOL -- and Kansas is underwater on that ... drawing?

 

[dad]

elevant knowledge, but I'll admit it's the prime source of the events that happened in the great flood story.

Right. So if population grew fast, there must be a reason.

And there is no such disturbance indicated in the evidence found for the time that the bible says the flood happened (roughly 2500BCE).

Dates have no meaning at all when they are belief based same state derived so called dates. The bible does not say that the flood happened bce. The whole bible pointed to Jesus, so it's dates are BC. If mountain building and rapid continent separation happened after that, how would you know?

Radiometric dating will give you a pretty good idea as to whether a layer is 4500 years old or 65 million years old.

No. It will not. Decay is a feature of this state. Therefore any imagined decay before this state is just that..imagined.

Before you play the "you can't prove fundamental forces were always the same" card again, keep in mind that science measures the physical. Science will not assume the fundamental forces have ever been different if there's never been any physical indication that they ever have. So stop thinking it before going forward.

Stop trying to play the 'you can prove fundamental forces were always the same' routine. You have no idea either way.

Are you implying that the flood was caused by some massive geological reformation? Neither the bible nor science indicate this. The bible says it rained and flooded, science and reason tells us that there was no global flood all together.

No, I imply that a massive4 universe law or state change came after the flood. With that, came many changes on earth. Such as short lives...

Basing my assertions on the known and observable evidence is not "assumption"... .

What is known and seen in 2010 is not seen and known billions of years from now, or before the flood. Keep it in perspective.

According to the bible, there were no "kinds" that survived the flood.

?? Source? News to me.

Consider there are are eight known living species of bear. Were there 16 bears on the ark or were there only 2? If there were 2, then you're saying they didn't adapt, but actually speciate.

Call it whatever you want. Evolve, adapt, speciate, change....

If there were 8, then you'd have to assume there was two of every breathing species on the ark - which makes the story an even greater mathematical impossibility given the dimensions of the ark vs the volume of it's passengers.

I assume there were 2 kinds generally, except the clean animals.
False. The dating is 100% present state in the past belief. Nothing more.

The only assertions that pass this dating off as "balderdash" come from creationists, typically because they either don't understand or intentionally ignore the reliability of this method.

False. There are no dates without a present state in place. That means you NEED to do more than assume one existed.

Again - there is no reason to assume time or fundamental (and physical) forces were different back then if there is no physical evidence to indicate that they ever were. Science measures the physical and observable.

There is every reason to know that the laws were different. Not from science, poor little physical only present state science has no reason to know either way.

The most popular assertion by creationists is that the flood occurred around 2500BCE. At this time, the Egyptians still worshiped Ra, Chinese civilization starts with their own religion and story of creation, Mesoamericans and Mesopotamians also had their respective cultures and religions. All this is supposed to stem from Noah's family?

A simple case of belief based wrong dating. The flood was first.

Which would be when and where, exactly? I bet they have.

If there was continetal separation after the flood, right there, that would narrow it down quite a bit.

The Black Sea Deluge is the closest thing there is in both time and location.

No. That is way after the fact. It also wasn't global, so is not Noah's flood.

 

[ug333]

There is every reason to know that the laws were different. Not from science, poor little physical only present state science has no reason to know either way.

Wrong. Changing fundamental forces would have left evidence behind. Hypothesize non-constant fundamental forces, devise an experiment to detect evidence that would be consistent with this hypothesis and not consistent with the current "constant" hypothesis, and execute said experiment.

If that experiment comes back with a result that is consistent with your hypothesis, you will change the world of science forever. Not only that, but you will change it in a way that will re-insert a young earth into the mainstream scientific discussion. A YEC's dream.

I wish you the best of luck.

 

[dad]

Wrong. Changing fundamental forces would have left evidence behind.

Says you. However, if this state is the change that was left behind, we would see no such evidence of change within this state.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Yes, new discoveries long ago forced Christian Geologists to abandon the young earth and global flood. Evangelical Christian and former YEC Davis Young has written up this part of the history of science.

History of the Collapse of Flood Geology and a Young Earth

"Christian" geologists? I smell a rat.

 

[Nostromo]

LOL -- and Kansas is underwater on that ... drawing?

I'm guessing you won't be spending the next few months/years poring over the evidence so as to understand how this drawing was constructed.

 

[Nostromo]

False. The dating is 100% present state in the past belief. Nothing more.

Do you ever talk about this to people when you're not on the internet?

 

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

"Christian" geologists? I smell a rat.

Did you read the article? I think your sense of "smell" is way off base.

Affiliation of Christian Geologists Homepage

 

[Targ]

LOL -- and Kansas is underwater on that ... drawing?

It's difficult to tell where Kansas is precisely, but from that map it seems it was pretty close to the Cretaceous sea that flowed through the USA, if not part of it. Jurassic and Triassic maps also show that there was a sea (the Sundance Sea) extending to where Kansas is. If you can give me a precise location where in Kansas it was that you (or whoever) found these seashells, I can have a look and see what age the surface rocks are in that location and then compare with maps of those time periods.

On another forum somebody used exactly the same sort of argument as AVET: that he found marine fossils on his farm, ergo Noah's global flood FTW! I asked him where he lived, he said Saskatchewan and gave me the name of the nearest town. I looked up the age of the surface layers on a geological map of Saskatchewan and pinpointed that his farm is built on upper Cretaceous rock. I looked at a Cretaceous map and lo and behold, there was a massive sea flowing through central USA and Canada then. Could that be why there are marine fossils on his farm? Yep, bingo!

 

[AV1611VET]

I'm guessing you won't be spending the next few months/years poring over the evidence so as to understand how this drawing was constructed.

Here's the thing, Nostromo.

As I understand it, even atheists agree that, at one time, every square inch of land was under water at one time or another.

The only difference, is that the Bible says it was all underwater at the same time, and scientists say it was underwater here and there.

Thus, in my opinion, scientists cannot connect the dots and show the earth underwater all at the same time, or their computers -- (which they programmed) -- will go 404.

 

[AV1611VET]

I looked at a Cretaceous map and lo and behold, there was a massive sea flowing through central USA and Canada then.

No argument here!

 

[Nostromo]

Here's the thing, Nostromo.

As I understand it, even atheists agree that, at one time, every square inch of land was under water at one time or another.

Could you quote your source? From a brief search I discovered that geologists believe a large part of Scandinavia has been above water since before the evolution of multicellular life. There are no marine fossils there, which is inconsistent with the idea of the global flood.

The only difference, is that the Bible says it was all underwater at the same time, and scientists say it was underwater here and there.

Another problem diluvial geology has is that areas have fossils of different marine life corresponding to the ages of the rocks in each place.

Thus, in my opinion, scientists cannot connect the dots and show the earth underwater all at the same time, or their computers -- (which they programmed) (no they didn't, software engineers did) -- will go 404.

No they cannot, because the evidence doesn't support that conclusion. You are entitled to your opinion though, however misinformed it is.

 

[Delphiki]

Says you. However, if this state is the change that was left behind, we would see no such evidence of change within this state.

It's been shown in your "gravity" thread that your changing state idea exists only in your imagination. No one and nothing else shares this idea. Not the bible, not the evidence, and not even AV1161VET who isn't afraid of preaching mathematical impossibilities supported by the bible... You are completely and utterly alone in this idea of yours. Until you show some biblical reason or some scientific evidence for your changing states, your idea is just that: an idea. It's not even a hypothesis. It's not based on anything at all. You've failed to show what it's based on.

So stop arguing with people based on some condition that only exists in your imagination. All you're doing is making a fool out of yourself. If you really stubbornly assert this, and are this obsessed about it as a real person, consider seeking psychiatric assistance. Otherwise, stop trolling your baseless and ludicrous idea.

 

[AV1611VET]

Could you quote your source?

Here's one of them: 498

Although he's not an atheist.

 

[Nostromo]

Here's one of them: 498

Although he's not an atheist.

So when you say "even atheists agree that, at one time, every square inch of land was under water at one time or another", you mean "someone on the forum, who's not an atheist, said that just about every region has had a flood".

What about the rest of my post?

 

[matthewgar]

One thought I have had for why so many flood myths have the earth covered by water...maybe it's because of these seashell stuff found inland? I mean if your plains people and you find in rocks animals and stuff that look like they are from lakes, but no where near water, it might make sense to think there was a flood or at least some how the earth was coveredby water.

Is sea fossils on mountains evidence for the flood, or evidence of the origins of the flood story?

 

[Mystman]

One thought I have had for why so many flood myths have the earth covered by water...maybe it's because of these seashell stuff found inland? I mean if your plains people and you find in rocks animals and stuff that look like they are from lakes, but no where near water, it might make sense to think there was a flood or at least some how the earth was coveredby water.

Is sea fossils on mountains evidence for the flood, or evidence of the origins of the flood story?

Simpler explanation: who where the guys who wrote stuff down? People who had a relatively advanced civilization. What is a necessity for having an advanced civilization? Farming. Where do you farm? Next to rivers. What happens to rivers? They flood. What does it look like if your entire river-side village and all nearby farms are swept away by a flood? As if the entire world has flooded. Or at least, an "accurate" story ("the entire village was covered in water!") could easily turn into an hyperbolic story ("everything was covered in water, as far as the eye could see!"), which could easily turn into a lie ("everything was covered in water!")

I haven't studied the various flood myths in detail, but I really doubt that any of them were written by desert nomads or people living in the african rainforest or something.

 

[Son of the King]

Simpler explanation: who where the guys who wrote stuff down? People who had a relatively advanced civilization. What is a necessity for having an advanced civilization? Farming. Where do you farm? Next to rivers. What happens to rivers? They flood. What does it look like if your entire river-side village and all nearby farms are swept away by a flood? As if the entire world has flooded. Or at least, an "accurate" story ("the entire village was covered in water!") could easily turn into an hyperbolic story ("everything was covered in water, as far as the eye could see!"), which could easily turn into a lie ("everything was covered in water!")

I haven't studied the various flood myths in detail, but I really doubt that any of them were written by desert nomads or people living in the african rainforest or something.

It almost seems some what amazing that so many flood stories (myths) got passed on through the ages by many different cultures and people unless there was some sort of truth in it somewhere. Check these out

 

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

It almost seems some what amazing that so many flood stories (myths) got passed on through the ages by many different cultures and people unless there was some sort of truth in it somewhere.Check these out

You should check them out. The great differences in all these stories show that they could not have been handed down from one single family that was the ancestors of everyone on earth a few thousand years ago.
Here is one of my favorites
Nisqually (Washington):The people became so numerous that they ate all the fish and game and started to eat each other. They were so wicked that Dokibatl, the Changer, flooded the earth. All living things were destroyed except one woman and one dog, which survived atop Tacobud (Mt. Ranier). From them the next race of people were born.

Noah was a dog

Once again something creationists claim to be evidence for the global flood is actually evidence against it.