TLK Valentine
I've already read the books you want burned.
- Apr 15, 2012
- 64,493
- 30,322
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Agnostic
- Marital Status
- Single
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.
Thanks for the laugh.
Oh wait, were you serious?
One, I would still like to see some evidence of the Amazon River basin sinking.
Since Noah preached many years while building the ark, one assumes folks had some general idea, but did not believe it. Possibly one of the biggest structures in the pre flood world, the ark would likely have been seen for miles in several directions. I don't recall that Noah got some message to flee to the wilderness to build the ark either.
If there were slow rains, the wicked would have had weeks to try to burn or break into or somehow destroy the ark. They had metal in those days, so they had metal implements to do so. The pitch on the ark was likely some sort of accelerant to fire, and attacking a wooden structure with pitch inside and out in a mere slow rain would probably be no great deterrence.
I would say the picture is one od sudden destruction, where oceans of water poured down, and gushed up, utterly destroying life in short order...even though some folks would have sought higher ground in a hurry, and possibly survived some days longer.
OldWiseGuy said, "I think the many poetic terms and phrases obscures what might have actually happened. Also the translators had to work within the framework of the language, and within the framework of what they believed, and/or what was expedient, at the time."
Can you give some specific examples?
What features would your mom have if she lived through the flood? What features would the geologic formation need to exhibit if the spaghetti monster slept on them? Try coming up with sound questions.
I don't know.
That is a serious problem. It indicates that you already have the conclusion in mind, and are trying to invent ways that the evidence can fit your model, no matter how ludicrous.
If every potential observation would be consistent with your model, then you don't have a model.
I'll just wait until science, famous for constantly changing it's conclusions, finally supports my model.
Science uses falsifiable models. You don't.
I'm not ready to surrender my model to failure.
Thanks.
No, there isn't. I already showed you that if the earth were a perfectly smooth ball the water depth would only be 1.6 miles, nowhere near deep enough to cover the mountains of Ararat. Remember, ~70% of the earth's surface is ALREADY covered by water. Distributing that water evenly while raising the seafloor is going to lessen the pressure on the continental plates overall.The earth is still rebounding from the weight of the glaciers in many areas of the north. If the continents sink under the weight of a massive flood there is enough water to cover the mountains of Ararat.
If you think the egg example helps you, then you misunderstood the example.The weight of the mountains themselves would aid in this. Your 'egg' example is interesting because under my model the earth would 'egg out', or become misshapen, as if the land were squeezed inward and the seafloors bulged out.
The bible is filled with metaphor, and with 'choices' of the translators. The "eyes of God running to and fro through the earth" is a poetic reference to the angelic corps of Gabriel.
That Eve 'gave' (the fruit) to Adam and he did eat is a translators choice. That Eve 'put upon' Adam to eat of it is a much more accurate translation. The translators made that arbitrary choice probably because they were all married and feared the consequence of revealing the real meaning.
You are still ignoring both what the Bible says about the characteristics of the Flood and the scientific evidence we see.
This is how I envision Noah's flood coming in; like an ocean tide. No surge, no tsunami.
http://i1.ytimg.com/vi/z_zbgBC-vLc/mqdefault.jpg
This is how I envision Noah's flood coming in; like an ocean tide. No surge, no tsunami.
http://i1.ytimg.com/vi/z_zbgBC-vLc/mqdefault.jpg
Do you see the idea of science changing to fit the evidence as a bad thing?I'll just wait until science, famous for constantly changing it's conclusions, finally supports my model.
The problem is that your model has no evidence, you have not demonstrated any way for what you are proposing to actually happen, and you have made no determinations as to what would falsify your model. Therefore I would say that what you have is not a "model" in the scientific sense but a more of a "wild guess".I'm not ready to surrender my model to failure.
I'll just wait until science, famous for constantly changing it's conclusions, finally supports my model.
Can you give some specific example related to the Flood since that is what we are discussing?
A tsunami is created by the raising of the sea floor. The massive tsunami in the Indian ocean a few years ago was caused by the sea floor rising about 15 feet. Just thought I would mention that.
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?