Noah's Ark Mystery

[Split Rock]

The Flood

History of the Collapse of Flood Geology and a Young Earth

 

[Split Rock]

Ha, that would give questioners answers as to why God claimed the whole "world" would be flooded - it was Pangaea - PAN (all) GAEA (Earth) - literally "all earth." The "world" was all one. Then, there is Panthalassa (thanks AV,) which was the "waters separated from the firmament under the waters (rainforest mist.)

HA. It is ridiculous how many answers are in our faces, while programmed culture teaches us to deny and ignore the facts - all while it is dancing in our faces!

The "whole earth" was actually "the land" that the Hebrews knew. There is no indication from scripture that there was one continent at the time.

 

[Lollerskates]

The famous ID representative Kent Hovind dismissed the idea of Pangaea. According to him, Africa would have had to shrink roughly 40%.

Here he is explaining it.

That's fine. During the flood, God said there would be waters coming up from beneath also. That, to me, insinuates at least some sort of seismic activity - which means earth from any "continent" could have sloughed off, or rose. Something like 5000 years (of no first-hand record between now and Noah's flood) is a second to Earth. A lot happens in one second.

Pangaea is something that has become a philosophy of ancient culture. But, just thinking physically, even children can look at a globe and see that maybe the continents once fit together. Thinking anthropologically, a combined singular land mass within 30 degrees above and below the equator would create a paradise, with an atmosphere that is "greenhouse-like." This makes reason why a rainbow would be a novelty to post-antediluvian people: you need the right amount of moisture density, right incidence angles, and right amount of sunlight. You don't see rainbows in the S. American rainforest except in waterfall mists. You do see rainbows in N. America, where the atmosphere is thin (comparatively,) and the moisture is just right.

 

[Lollerskates]

Where in the bible did it say anything about a "long-orbit dwarf star companion of the sun." Where does it even say that stars are anything like the sun? How does a dwarf star cause accelerated plate movements that would separate thecontinents within a year?

The dead sea scrolls talk extensively about The Destroyer - a fiery light star in the sky that rained down red dust and turned people crazy. That is characteristic of a red/brown dwarf star. The red dust is iron oxide. Even the bible says that the Hebrews were protected by a cloud while [red] dust rained down. The bible is not the "end-all-be-all" of scripture, or history for that matter. The bible originally had no chapters, no verses, and was not a collection: it was just a collection of texts. Moreover, the Church has played games choosing and picking which texts are "inspired" to include in the bible.

How does a dwarf star cause accelerated plate movements within a year? Do you know what a dwarf star is? Gravity does most of the work. Electrodynamics finishes the job. Atmospheric chemistry supplements the last bit of work. It is very easy for a dwarf star to pull on little 'ole earth's plates and pull up mountain ranges, tear down continents, or move them. If the moon affects tides, what do you think a star will do? As it stands now, if the moon were gone, there would be a global flood along the height of 1400ft that would crash all along equatorial (and beyond) land. The moon holds that water at a safe level by tidal force/gravity. Stars that come upon the earth can do a lot more damage.

Look up the declassified (at least, I had access to them in University) NASA document that details a red/brown-dwarf long-period dwarf star called Wormwood. It was found in 1985. It has a Jovian size of 1.5 if I remember correctly.

And, the bible talks extensively about stars being suns - interchangeably. It even talks about entities being as suns, and as stars. You should re-read the bible (yea, the entire bible.) Or google search it. I'm not giving you verses just so you can argue them down.

 

[Lollerskates]

The "whole earth" was actually "the land" that the Hebrews knew. There is no indication from scripture that there was one continent at the time.

There is no indication in scripture that an average elephant weighs less than a blue whale's tongue. That doesn't mean it isn't true. God expects us reason - to be intelligent, and come to logical conclusions. He didn't make us dumb. He expects us to think.

As I said before, if a child can look at a global map and see that the pieces fit together like a puzzle, we should be able to (as adults) figure that out too. Earth in Hebrew is "erets," which is firm land - Terra Firma. So, your agrument actually helps mine: the flood covered the whole firm land - which supports a Pangaea theory. That is, of course, if you believe what God said, and the scriptures. Science is not the arbiter of truth. Yet, it would not hurt if you have the ability to confirm and reproduce (or at least understand enough to refute or accept) scientific theories.

 

[ThinkForYourself]

That's fine. During the flood, God said there would be waters coming up from beneath also. That, to me, insinuates at least some sort of seismic activity - which means earth from any "continent" could have sloughed off, or rose. Something like 5000 years (of no first-hand record between now and Noah's flood) is a second to Earth. A lot happens in one second.

Pangaea is something that has become a philosophy of ancient culture. But, just thinking physically, even children can look at a globe and see that maybe the continents once fit together. Thinking anthropologically, a combined singular land mass within 30 degrees above and below the equator would create a paradise, with an atmosphere that is "greenhouse-like." This makes reason why a rainbow would be a novelty to post-antediluvian people: you need the right amount of moisture density, right incidence angles, and right amount of sunlight. You don't see rainbows in the S. American rainforest except in waterfall mists. You do see rainbows in N. America, where the atmosphere is thin (comparatively,) and the moisture is just right.

Loller, how could the continent of Austrailia have moved so far in such a short period of time? The forces required would be ridiculous, and I'm pretty sure would have killed all life on the continent.

 

[KWCrazy]

Loller, how could the continent of Austrailia have moved so far in such a short period of time? The forces required would be ridiculous, and I'm pretty sure would have killed all life on the continent.

Ever see what happens when you blow up a balloon? It's possible that the earth expanded and broke apart the continents. It's no less probable than quantum theory.

 

[Lollerskates]

Loller, how could the continent of Austrailia have moved so far in such a short period of time? The forces required would be ridiculous, and I'm pretty sure would have killed all life on the continent.

Ever see what happens when you blow up a balloon? It's possible that the earth expanded and broke apart the continents. It's no less probable than quantum theory.

This (KWCrazy).

It sounds like you do not know of the many possibilities of how a planetoid can undergo such drastic changes. That is fortunate, since it would most likely mean our demise. I presented one very favorable possibility - a Jovian mass coming upon the earth. That would contract and dilate any earth-sized planet by means of gravity and electromagnetism.

Why electromagnetism? Because, the earth has an electromagnetic bubble called the magnetosphere, generated by a fluid iron core. Hot (liquid) metals are ionic - stripped of electrons. Charged and moving. Maxwell's equations tells us that a moving charge produces changes in electric fields - which produce a magnetic field (magnetosphere.) Now, considering the core is supposedly full of charged moving hot iron, what do you think would happen when a larger body of charged moving hot iron gets close to the earth? (A dead star - like a dwarf star - has a mostly iron core.) The earth will stretch and contract to alleviate the tremendous electromagnetic perturbations.

 

[ThinkForYourself]

Ever see what happens when you blow up a balloon? It's possible that the earth expanded and broke apart the continents. It's no less probable than quantum theory.

Um, the earth is nothing like a balloon

 

[AV1611VET]

Loller, how could the continent of Austrailia have moved so far in such a short period of time? The forces required would be ridiculous, and I'm pretty sure would have killed all life on the continent.

How many died in this "tragedy"?

2 Kings 20:11 And Isaiah the prophet cried unto the LORD: and he brought the shadow ten degrees backward, by which it had gone down in the dial of Ahaz.

 

[ThinkForYourself]

This (KWCrazy).

It sounds like you do not know of the many possibilities of how a planetoid can undergo such drastic changes. That is fortunate, since it would most likely mean our demise. I presented one very favorable possibility - a Jovian mass coming upon the earth. That would contract and dilate any earth-sized planet by means of gravity and electromagnetism.

Why electromagnetism? Because, the earth has an electromagnetic bubble called the magnetosphere, generated by a fluid iron core. Hot (liquid) metals are ionic - stripped of electrons. Charged and moving. Maxwell's equations tells us that a moving charge produces changes in electric fields - which produce a magnetic field (magnetosphere.) Now, considering the core is supposedly full of charged moving hot iron, what do you think would happen when a larger body of charged moving hot iron gets close to the earth? (A dead star - like a dwarf star - has a mostly iron core.) The earth will stretch and contract to alleviate the tremendous electromagnetic perturbations.

And surely cause devastation on an unheard of scale, at least during recorded history.

Yet no one recorded it. So most obviously the above did not happen.

 

[Lollerskates]

And surely cause devastation on an unheard of scale, at least during recorded history.

Yet no one recorded it. So most obviously the above did not happen.

What record would survive? Though there are petroglyphs that describe an event like I just mentioned. They knew back then some sort of information would last on rock.

And devastation of unheard scale? Do you remember every human died except Noah and His family (with God's protection.) It is very possible, and probable that what I said is what may have happened. So much so, that NASA is preparing for [another] event. As I told another person earlier in this thread, go look up the declassified NASA files on the long-period possible companion dwarf star they call Wormwood (just like in Revelation.) It was found in 1985. Why do you think they classified all near earth objects, and act surprised when they streak across the sky, or crash into earth (especially as frequently as they have been?) The information is there, but they know most people would rather ask a peer (cause they can dismiss them) than go to the source. History will repeat itself as it always does - this time it will be much worse.

 

[AV1611VET]

Yet no one recorded it.

How do you know?

(I get tired of hearing people say this.)

 

[Split Rock]

The dead sea scrolls talk extensively about The Destroyer - a fiery light star in the sky that rained down red dust and turned people crazy. That is characteristic of a red/brown dwarf star. The red dust is iron oxide. Even the bible says that the Hebrews were protected by a cloud while [red] dust rained down. The bible is not the "end-all-be-all" of scripture, or history for that matter. The bible originally had no chapters, no verses, and was not a collection: it was just a collection of texts. Moreover, the Church has played games choosing and picking which texts are "inspired" to include in the bible.

Do you really believe that a red/brown dwarf star would rain down red dust on the earth if it passed by??

How does a dwarf star cause accelerated plate movements within a year? Do you know what a dwarf star is? Gravity does most of the work. Electrodynamics finishes the job. Atmospheric chemistry supplements the last bit of work. It is very easy for a dwarf star to pull on little 'ole earth's plates and pull up mountain ranges, tear down continents, or move them. If the moon affects tides, what do you think a star will do? As it stands now, if the moon were gone, there would be a global flood along the height of 1400ft that would crash all along equatorial (and beyond) land. The moon holds that water at a safe level by tidal force/gravity. Stars that come upon the earth can do a lot more damage.

I can accept that it would raise tides and create huge waves that could flood parts of the earth. I do not buy that it would cause plate movements of the type you are claiming.

Look up the declassified (at least, I had access to them in University) NASA document that details a red/brown-dwarf long-period dwarf star called Wormwood. It was found in 1985. It has a Jovian size of 1.5 if I remember correctly.

So?

And, the bible talks extensively about stars being suns - interchangeably. It even talks about entities being as suns, and as stars. You should re-read the bible (yea, the entire bible.) Or google search it. I'm not giving you verses just so you can argue them down.

I would like for you to provide bible passages to support your assertion.

There is no indication in scripture that an average elephant weighs less than a blue whale's tongue. That doesn't mean it isn't true. God expects us reason - to be intelligent, and come to logical conclusions. He didn't make us dumb. He expects us to think.

And when we think we conclude that the earth is billions of years old and there was no global flood.

firm land[/I] - Terra Firma. So, your agrument actually helps mine: the flood covered the whole firm land - which supports a Pangaea theory. That is, of course, if you believe what God said, and the scriptures. Science is not the arbiter of truth. Yet, it would not hurt if you have the ability to confirm and reproduce (or at least understand enough to refute or accept) scientific theories.

No, the land that the Hebrews knew was not the whole world, regardless of whether it was one continent or not. Not to mention the fact that major landmarks in existance today are mentioned in the O.T., like the Euphrates and Tigris rivers.

 

[Lollerskates]

Do you really believe that a red/brown dwarf star would rain down red dust on the earth if it passed by??

Yes. Do you understand how gravity and electrodynamics work? I say rained down, the technical term would be flowing through a 1) gravity potential and an 2) electrodynamic potential.

I can accept that it would raise tides and create huge waves that could flood parts of the earth. I do not buy that it would cause plate movements of the type you are claiming.

Well, that is fair since I am not selling anything. I will have to assume you aren't a physicist, geologist, biologist, chemist, or mechanic. If you were, it would be very easy to understand that a Jovian mass on close approach to earth trumps any and all forces the earth-sized planet may utilize to hold its "plates" together. When a meteor the size of a school crashes into the earth, it has enough power to break crustal plates. Any earthquake over 12.0 will break the crust from sonic intensity. Don't you think with the electromagnetics and gravity of a Jovian sized mass upon the earth would cause 12.0+ earthquakes at least (not to mention pulling of crust/displacement.)

So?

Did you look it up? If you did, you wouldn't still be arguing with me, because you would see in the abstract that this Jovian mass has a period of either 3600 years, 7000 years or 11,000 years. At least one of those periods (7000 or 11,000 years) is around the time of Noah, and one of those times (3600 years) coincides with the Exodus (which was probably the same type of event based on the Dead Sea Scrolls.) If it is 3600 year period, then it would be a candidate for both Noah, Exodus, and right about now it would be coming up on our turn.

There is no excuse for ignorance. Look up the declassified file and you will have NASA's seal of approval, not lollerskates.

I would like for you to provide bible passages to support your assertion.

So you can dismiss them, right? You didn't even look up the NASA file that would answer all of your questions and more. Just like I said in the previous post: "Or google search it. I'm not giving you verses just so you can argue them down."

And when we think we conclude that the earth is billions of years old and there was no global flood.

That is called guessing - which, mind you is part of thinking, but I wouldn't put guessing on a pedestal. And, you have no idea what research money is going toward, and who gets the information. 80% of grant money is private, that means the public does not get the info unless the sponsor(s) says they can. It also means scientists research what the sponsor(s) tells them to.

"Thinking" kept medicine in the dark ages for centuries because it was ludicrous to believe something called microorganisms cause illness.

"Thinking" kept medicine in the dark ages for decades because no one would believe most peptic ulsers were caused by helicobacter pylori bacterium until a scientist was forced to swallow a petri dish full of it to prove to his scientific colleagues he was right.

I am highly unimpressed with that form of "thinking." Independent thought is powerful, which is why I became a scientist because I wanted to be able to prove all that stuff lab coats said when I was young. If I ever want to be a savant on car logic, I will go to auto school. There is no excuse for ignorance.

No, the land that the Hebrews knew was not the whole world, regardless of whether it was one continent or not. Not to mention the fact that major landmarks in existance today are mentioned in the O.T., like the Euphrates and Tigris rivers.

How would you know it wasn't the whole world? Why do you keep using the bible to back you up, but reject anything else when it doesn't support your arguments?

If you actually read that with understanding (about the "landmarks,") you would know there were FOUR rivers - the Tigris and Euphrates were two of the four rivers that were in Eden - that are existent today. A better question would be, "Where are the other two rivers?"

But back to the point, you have no idea what the world looked like 10,000+ years ago. Are you an archeologist, or have you do any excavation archeology yourself? Or, are you parroting what "experts" say? Independent thought is much more powerful: become an archeologist and prove me wrong (or right.) Or, don't parrot to me things you have not even researched yourself - things that you take from other humans as truth without testing them yourself. I don't intellectually respect that. If it is just your opinion, however, then say that - that way, we know it is opinion, and it is not fact. So, three choices in the future of our discussions if we have them. 1) Either you studied the stuff yourself, and you are giving an educated, independent statement of finding. 2) You got it from an "expert," without independently testing their assertions. 3) You are opining (and, therefore there is no reason your statement should be taken as a truth.) I can tell you the science I presented is my independent, self-researched assertion. My field is physics, so I have a myriad of avenues for independent self-verification over many disciplines.

 

[Split Rock]

Ever see what happens when you blow up a balloon? It's possible that the earth expanded and broke apart the continents. It's no less probable than quantum theory.

This is an old hypothesis that has been discounted now (though on a longer time scale). But then so is creationism.

 

[ThinkForYourself]

What record would survive? Though there are petroglyphs that describe an event like I just mentioned. They knew back then some sort of information would last on rock.

And devastation of unheard scale? Do you remember every human died except Noah and His family (with God's protection.) It is very possible, and probable that what I said is what may have happened. So much so, that NASA is preparing for [another] event. As I told another person earlier in this thread, go look up the declassified NASA files on the long-period possible companion dwarf star they call Wormwood (just like in Revelation.) It was found in 1985. Why do you think they classified all near earth objects, and act surprised when they streak across the sky, or crash into earth (especially as frequently as they have been?) The information is there, but they know most people would rather ask a peer (cause they can dismiss them) than go to the source. History will repeat itself as it always does - this time it will be much worse.

If all written records of this supposed event were destroyed by the cataclysmic forces, how did life, and specifically man, survive?

If only records recorded in rock could survive, then life would have surely perished.

 

[ThinkForYourself]

...
I can accept that it would raise tides and create huge waves that could flood parts of the earth. I do not buy that it would cause plate movements of the type you are claiming.
...

Agreed Split Rock.

The forces necessary to move an entire continent 1/4 of the way around the world in 1000 years would be cataclysmic.

All the other plates would have to move out of the way, so all the plates on earth are moving at a ridiculous speed for 1000 years, devastating earthquakes are occurring on an almost daily basis, yet everybody lived, and nobody thought to write it down.

 

[AV1611VET]

Agreed Split Rock.

The forces necessary to move an entire continent 1/4 of the way around the world in 1000 years would be cataclysmic.

All the other plates would have to move out of the way, so all the plates on earth are moving at a ridiculous speed for 1000 years, devastating earthquakes are occurring on an almost daily basis, yet everybody lived, and nobody thought to write it down.

Weird, isn't it?

Who is this Guy, that even the wind and sea obey Him?

 

[Split Rock]

Yes. Do you understand how gravity and electrodynamics work? I say rained down, the technical term would be flowing through a 1) gravity potential and an 2) electrodynamic potential.

So, a dwarf star came close enough to earth to rain down red dust, and all it did was create a global flood and neatly separate the continents? Can you calculate the amount of energy released from moving the continents to their current position in one years time (or less)? Can you then tell us what effect that would have on life on earth? Please note that according to scripture, they all drowned in the flood waters, they didn't roast like a turkey in an oven.

Well, that is fair since I am not selling anything. I will have to assume you aren't a physicist, geologist, biologist, chemist, or mechanic. If you were, it would be very easy to understand that a Jovian mass on close approach to earth trumps any and all forces the earth-sized planet may utilize to hold its "plates" together. When a meteor the size of a school crashes into the earth, it has enough power to break crustal plates. Any earthquake over 12.0 will break the crust from sonic intensity. Don't you think with the electromagnetics and gravity of a Jovian sized mass upon the earth would cause 12.0+ earthquakes at least (not to mention pulling of crust/displacement.)

Your assumption (as are many others you have exposed here) would be wrong. I have a Ph.D. in Biology. That means little concerning geology or astronomy, but I do happen to know a few things about these subjects as well (I am no expert, however).

There is no force keeping the plates from moving faster other than friction between plates. The movement itself is provided by ocean sea floor spreading, not by earthquakes. Earthquakes are the result of release of tension between plates, they are not the driving force behind plate movement per se. So, even if a passing dwarf star were to cause earhquakes, it would not neatly separate the continents as you claim. The results would instead be flooding and possibly the pulling of the earth out of its orbit. Such an occurrance would have far worse consiequences than you are claiming. None are consistant with scripture.

Did you look it up? If you did, you wouldn't still be arguing with me, because you would see in the abstract that this Jovian mass has a period of either 3600 years, 7000 years or 11,000 years. At least one of those periods (7000 or 11,000 years) is around the time of Noah, and one of those times (3600 years) coincides with the Exodus (which was probably the same type of event based on the Dead Sea Scrolls.) If it is 3600 year period, then it would be a candidate for both Noah, Exodus, and right about now it would be coming up on our turn.

There is no concrete evidence for the existance of such a star, and your scriptural support is at best thin.

There is no excuse for ignorance. Look up the declassified file and you will have NASA's seal of approval, not lollerskates.

If you have a reference or a link, provide it and I will look at it. It is your assertion, not mine.

So you can dismiss them, right? You didn't even look up the NASA file that would answer all of your questions and more. Just like I said in the previous post: "Or google search it. I'm not giving you verses just so you can argue them down."

How does a NASA file help to find an association between "star" and "sun" in scripture? Don't make assertions here if you cannot back them up. Give me a reference or a link and I will look at it.

That is called guessing - which, mind you is part of thinking, but I wouldn't put guessing on a pedestal. And, you have no idea what research money is going toward, and who gets the information. 80% of grant money is private, that means the public does not get the info unless the sponsor(s) says they can. It also means scientists research what the sponsor(s) tells them to.

Oh, so now 100s of years of research on geology and biology are nothing but "guessing." Unless they are present in a particular declassified NASA paper, I suppose.

"Thinking" kept medicine in the dark ages for centuries because it was ludicrous to believe something called microorganisms cause illness.

Non sequiter. It was thinking and advancments in technology that led to the connection between microorganisms and disease.

"Thinking" kept medicine in the dark ages for decades because no one would believe most peptic ulsers were caused by helicobacter pylori bacterium until a scientist was forced to swallow a petri dish full of it to prove to his scientific colleagues he was right.

Exceptions do not prove the rule. It was the evidence that convinced doctors that helicobacter pylori causes peptic ulcers. Where is your evidence of this star's existance?

I am highly unimpressed with that form of "thinking." Independent thought is powerful, which is why I became a scientist because I wanted to be able to prove all that stuff lab coats said when I was young. If I ever want to be a savant on car logic, I will go to auto school. There is no excuse for ignorance.

Show me the hard data that this star exists.

How would you know it wasn't the whole world? Why do you keep using the bible to back you up, but reject anything else when it doesn't support your arguments?

Why do you do so? There is no reason to believe (and every reason not to) that the authors of GEN knew anything about the world outside their little corner of it. But there is no need to try and parse words from scripture to figure out if there was a global flood. The geological record is there for us to examine. There is no evidence of a global flood in the geological record. This has been known since the early to mid 1800's.

But back to the point, you have no idea what the world looked like 10,000+ years ago. Are you an archeologist, or have you do any excavation archeology yourself? Or, are you parroting what "experts" say? Independent thought is much more powerful: become an archeologist and prove me wrong (or right.) Or, don't parrot to me things you have not even researched yourself - things that you take from other humans as truth without testing them yourself. I don't intellectually respect that. If it is just your opinion, however, then say that - that way, we know it is opinion, and it is not fact. So, three choices in the future of our discussions if we have them. 1) Either you studied the stuff yourself, and you are giving an educated, independent statement of finding. 2) You got it from an "expert," without independently testing their assertions. 3) You are opining (and, therefore there is no reason your statement should be taken as a truth.) I can tell you the science I presented is my independent, self-researched assertion. My field is physics, so I have a myriad of avenues for independent self-verification over many disciplines.

So, you have independently gathered evidence for this "wormwood" dwarf star? You have independently examined the geological column? You have independently escavated sites in Mesopotamia? No one in science nowadays can be a jack -of -all- trades... there is too much specialization required. Being a physicist does not make you an expert on biology, geology, or astronomy, btw.