Local Flood

A4C · Jun 29, 2005

notto said:
Actually, it would be up to you to support your claim. On what basis do you make the claim? What is the source of your information about the geology of the east coast? You stated that there are no sediment layers there. Give us sustantive evidence that there are no sediment layers there if you think you are right.

You need to start supporting your claims with the references from which you made them.

Otherwise, as I will demonstrate here, all I have to say to refute you is that there are sediment layers on the east coast. Now, give me some substantive evidence if you think I am wrong.

Suggesting that I am wrong does not make it so Perhaps the challenge is to investigate the sedimentary/fossil record over the US and see if you can come up with explanations

nvxplorer · Jun 29, 2005

jsw_24 said:
It's easy to see how Seminoles fans misconstrue the concept of God when their quaterback claims HE is God. ..."Get a life." Seriously grandpa.

A concept of God is not dependent on a historical global flood.

notto · Jun 29, 2005

A4C said:
All the sediment/fossils WERE NOT laid down at the same time. There were many days of rain and many factors would determine what/who perished during that time. Add to this the complete upheval of a massive receeding of water taking a further amount of time where previously laid down sediment would be re distributed. Now with such flow of massive ammounts of water and silt (as with the sunami) would have effect on the equilibrium of the earths mass would it not . Do you think this could account for the unequal distribution of sediment in the US . Well I do . And perhaps other features as well .
It is easy to see what is the "base" level of this earth . Does it concern you at all that above this level there is a mass if species that just seem to appear without any sign of them evolving. Why you would want to hold onto such a floored "doctrine " when there is so much evidence that tries to "prove" it right only tends to highlight how ridiculus it is.

How do you explain 15 foot layers of dinosaur egg nests in between sediment layers and dinosaur footprints around fully rooted trees on top of coal seams using your model. Please be specific.

Name three species that appears without any sign of them evolving.

Again, you are making claims. Can you support them and show that you know enough about that which you rail against to make the claims you do?

Let's quit talking in generalities and actually, for once, address a real fossil, land form, or peice of geology by actually referring specifically to what we find in the area you pick and then explain it with your model.

notto · Jun 29, 2005

A4C said:
Suggesting that I am wrong does not make it so Perhaps the challenge is to investigate the sedimentary/fossil record over the US and see if you can come up with explanations

Actually, I would have assumed that you would have done this. You made a claim but again you refuse to back it up with even a mention of the source or sources upon which you base this claim. I provided a detailed source of the sediment and geologic column on the east coast. You apparently did not read it otherwise you would not continue to make the claim. I'm not suggesting you are wrong, I showed you that you were wrong.

What would you like to explain? Can we discuss footprints in coal seams? How do you explain that?

A4C · Jun 29, 2005

notto said:
You also seem to be asserting something that we would not assume is correct. You are suggesting that we should expect the same amount of layers on the east coast as the west coast. A little thing called glaciers made sure that was not the case. Now, since you know so much about the geology of the east coast, did your source for your claim mention glaciation and its affect on the east coast?

Could you imagine the scene: All the scientists are gathered and the leader speaks:
No we have this problem on what to tell the poeple . You see we have all this sediment on the West Coast and little on the East coast so how are we going to get away with saying that it was ALL laid down over millions of years.
Yes Prof. Evo Lution
"Well Sir how about telling them it was glaciars that did it"
Good suggestion OK any more? OK Prof. Godidit what is it this time.
"Sir, Perhaps it was the flood"
"WHAT Get that obstrucionist out of the meeting, we don't want his type here. Now are there any more suggestions? No . OK then we will go with the glacier one they ought to accept that. "

Ozymandius · Jun 29, 2005

A4C said:
Could you imagine the scene: All the scientists are gathered and the leader speaks:
No we have this problem on what to tell the poeple . You see we have all this sediment on the West Coast and little on the East coast so how are we going to get away with saying that it was ALL laid down over millions of years.
Yes Prof. Evo Lution
"Well Sir how about telling them it was glaciars that did it"
Good suggestion OK any more? OK Prof. Godidit what is it this time.
"Sir, Perhaps it was the flood"
"WHAT Get that obstrucionist out of the meeting, we don't want his type here. Now are there any more suggestions? No . OK then we will go with the glacier one they ought to accept that. "

Well I'm sold.

notto · Jun 29, 2005

A4C said:
Could you imagine the scene: All the scientists are gathered and the leader speaks:
No we have this problem on what to tell the poeple . You see we have all this sediment on the West Coast and little on the East coast so how are we going to get away with saying that it was ALL laid down over millions of years.
Yes Prof. Evo Lution
"Well Sir how about telling them it was glaciars that did it"
Good suggestion OK any more? OK Prof. Godidit what is it this time.
"Sir, Perhaps it was the flood"
"WHAT Get that obstrucionist out of the meeting, we don't want his type here. Now are there any more suggestions? No . OK then we will go with the glacier one they ought to accept that. "

Once more you are ignoring evidence and not addressing it. Glaciation is a well understood phenomena and there is abundant evidence for it. We have glacial morains, exposed bedrock showing the scraping movement, and the abundance of glacial lakes. Glaciers explain many of the geologic features (you know - the things talked about in geology books) that the flood certainly can not explain.

http://www.homepage.montana.edu/~geol445/hyperglac/
http://boris.qub.ac.uk/ggg/

Ignoring the ice age - that's a new one.

Can you explain how we get footprints and tree roots on top of coal seams in your scenario?

I notice again that your post is devoid of any references or discussion of actually geology or fossils.

Are we at the avoidence part of your song and dance already?

A4C · Jun 29, 2005

notto said:
Once more you are ignoring evidence and not addressing it. Glaciation is a well understood phenomena and there is abundant evidence for it. We have glacial morains, exposed bedrock showing the scraping movement, and the abundance of glacial lakes. Glaciers explain many of the geologic features (you know - the things talked about in geology books) that the flood certainly can not explain.

http://www.homepage.montana.edu/~geol445/hyperglac/
http://boris.qub.ac.uk/ggg/

Ignoring the ice age - that's a new one.

Can you explain how we get footprints and tree roots on top of coal seams in your scenario?

I notice again that your post is devoid of any references or discussion of actually geology or fossils.

Are we at the avoidence part of your song and dance already?

Glaciers +Ice ages = total fabrication

notto · Jun 29, 2005

A4C said:
Glaciers +Ice ages = total fabrication

You should tell your fellow creationists. Most of them disagree.

I notice again you have not addressed or provided any information, sources, references or facts to support your claim. Still no mention of any specific geology, fossils, or area that you can explain with your scenario.

Ozymandius · Jun 29, 2005

A4C said:
Glaciers +Ice ages = total fabrication

I think it might be time for the block list.

Dr.GH · Jun 29, 2005

Dominus Fidelis said:
Do you believe there is evidence for a local, yet massive, flood ?

Yes

Dominus Fidelis said:
in the Black Sea region?

There was one there, but it was not the one that generated the narative reported in Genesis.

Dominus Fidelis said:
Is it possible that the only people in the world at the time were in that region?

No, regardless of where the Genesis flood ocurred.

nvxplorer · Jun 29, 2005

A4C said:
Glaciers +Ice ages = total fabrication

Here's one for ya, A4C.

If all of mankind is descended from Noah because of a global flood, that would mean all the New World people were also Noah's descendants. I'd be interested as to your theory on how they got here, and why we find no evidence of contemporary Middle Eastern technology in the Americas, but I'll pass on that (unless you volunteer an explanation).

I'm more interested on the lack of the Hebrew language anywhere in the New World. We would expect to see not only written Hebrew scripts, but remnants of the spoken language among Native Americans. As far as I know, there is little if any evidence of an alphabetic language among native New World people. No one was speaking anything resembling Hebrew in 1492.

How do you explain this?

Dr.GH · Jun 29, 2005

A4C,

I think it is fair to say that Pennsylvania is on the East Coast. There are many important fossil beds in Pennsylvania.

I think it is fair to say that Nova Scotia is on the East Coast. There are many important fossil beds in Nova Scotia.

I think it is fair to say that Georgia is on the East Coast. There are many important fossil beds in Georgia.

Fossils are found in sediments. Fossils are not found in lava, or basalt, or granite. There are deep sedimentry basins on the East Coast. An easy, if not 100% accurate "rule of thumb" is that were ever you find coal and oil, there are deep geological basins.

Where did you get the butt ingnorant idea that there are not deeply stratified basins on the East Coast? I live 3 blocks from the Pacific Ocean, and the Appalachian Mountains look to be on the East Coast from here. The Appalachian Mountains are on the East Coast as far as I am concerned. The Appalachian Mountains are uplifted sedimentry rock.

Matthew777 · Jun 29, 2005

Dominus Fidelis said:
Do you believe there is evidence for a local, yet massive, flood in the Black Sea region?

There is evidence and it is discussed in this article...

The Waters of the Flood
By Hugh Ross, Ph.D.
http://www.reasons.org/resources/apologetics/flood.shtml?main

I am surprised that you are a Roman Catholic young earther.

"Fundamentalists often make it a test of Christian orthodoxy to believe that the world was created in six 24-hour days and that no other interpretations of Genesis 1 are possible. They claim that until recently this view of Genesis was the only acceptable one—indeed, the only one there was.

The writings of the Fathers, who were much closer than we are in time and culture to the original audience of Genesis, show that this was not the case. There was wide variation of opinion on how long creation took. Some said only a few days; others argued for a much longer, indefinite period. Those who took the latter view appealed to the fact "that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day" (2 Pet. 3:8; cf. Ps. 90:4), that light was created on the first day, but the sun was not created till the fourth day (Gen. 1:3, 16), and that Adam was told he would die the same "day" as he ate of the tree, yet he lived to be 930 years old (Gen. 2:17, 5:5).

Catholics are at liberty to believe that creation took a few days or a much longer period, according to how they see the evidence, and subject to any future judgment of the Church (Pius XII’s 1950 encyclical Humani Generis 36–37). They need not be hostile to modern cosmology. The Catechism of the Catholic Church states, "[M]any scientific studies . . . have splendidly enriched our knowledge of the age and dimensions of the cosmos, the development of life forms, and the appearance of man. These studies invite us to even greater admiration for the greatness of the Creator" (CCC 283).
http://www.catholic.com/Library/Creation_and_Genesis.asp

jsw_24 · Jun 29, 2005

A concept of God is not dependent on a historical global flood.

You think?

A4C · Jun 29, 2005

nvxplorer said:
How do you explain this?

The tower of Babel

A4C · Jun 29, 2005

notto said:
What would you like to explain? Can we discuss footprints in coal seams? How do you explain that?

Possibly by animals walking on peat moss laid down by rotting vegetation before the flood . Do you have to keep PRATTing this stuff at me all the time?
Now how about for a change -How do you explain footprints in coal?

88Devin07 · Jun 30, 2005

It was definitely a world wide flood. Nothing else. This has been taught since the days of the flood and since the Apostles, there should have never been any other teaching.

All the scientific evidence points to a global flood... Also, the C14 exists more in post-flood fossils than in pre-flood fossils all over the earth. This shows that it was in fact a world wide flood...
Not only that, but flood sediment has been found all over the earth...
Additionally, they have found animal footprints, which, if it was a local flood wouldn't exist because they would have dissapeared over time.
Below and around some of those footprints, they have found footprints resembling what a raindrop would do...
They have also found in layers of the earth all over the world, that the layer has wave patterns as if it was underneath a lot of water in the past.

Remember, all of the human race and animals except those on the ark and the sea animals died.

Jet Black · Jun 30, 2005

Dominus Fidelis said:
Do you believe there is evidence for a local, yet massive, flood in the Black Sea region?

quite possibly

Is it possible that the only people in the world at the time were in that region?

no.

Matthew777 · Jun 30, 2005

88Devin07 said:
It was definitely a world wide flood. Nothing else. This has been taught since the days of the flood and since the Apostles, there should have never been any other teaching.

Did you know that only enough water exists to flood 22% of the earth's surface? As far as the scientific and theological side of the question, please refer to the article I posted by Dr. Hugh Ross.

Local Flood

Secrecy and Christ likeness cannot co-exist

Senior Contributor

Legend

Legend

Secrecy and Christ likeness cannot co-exist

Well-Known Member

Legend

Secrecy and Christ likeness cannot co-exist

Legend

Well-Known Member

Doc WinAce fan

Senior Contributor

Doc WinAce fan

Faith is the evidence of things unseen

Active Member

Secrecy and Christ likeness cannot co-exist

Secrecy and Christ likeness cannot co-exist

Orthodox Catholic Church

Jet Black

Guest

Faith is the evidence of things unseen

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency