|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Solving the Mystery of the Biblical Flood | |||||||||||||||||||
quicksink Inactive Member |
quote:Some did not survive and was restarted by new growth. [b]I'm sorry. Your quick assumption that coral survived won't cut it. the coral would have died, along with nearly every other non-brackish fish in the sea! Why? Because during the flood, salt and fresh water would have mixed. most fish cannot tolerate even slight changes in salinity. They die RIGHT AWAY. NO, THEY COULDN'T HAVE SURVIVED THE FLOOD (AND ANYWAY, THE FRESH WATER WOULD HAVE TAKEN A LONG TIME TO RESTORE THE OCEAN TO THE NORMAL LEVELS OF SALINITY). In addition, the rise in the ocean levels would have been so dramatic that it would have taken many days for it to return to normal levels. Coral could not have possibly survived this long. quote: Nope! coral takes MILLIONS of years to regrow. Even of this quick regrowth had indeed occured, we would see evidence of this. The flood would have made farming impossible (salt water destroys land), despite the fact farming was recorded several yrs after the flood. The flood would have killed all plants, including aquatic plants, which would have died without the shining of the sun. The chines and the Egyptians have made no record of the flood. Funny how they'd fail to even mention a rainstorm that covered the entire surface of the planet in 100s of ft of water. Shortly after the "flood", Chinese and Egyptians, who would have been moving back to their distant lands, were recording normally. If the flood had occured, the pyramids would have been destroyed. American species (we'll say the llama) would have travel across the deserts of the Mideast, the tropics of south asia, the temperates of china, the siberian tundra, the thick forest of alaska, the steep cliffs of the rockies, the thick forests of the cascades, the deserts of california, the mountains of mexico, and then finally home to their various homes in South america. all this without any food (where would you find food after a giant flood [noah, by the way, did not save plants]). they also did this without leaving one fossil behind. no remains either. and here's an article THAT I DIDN'T WRITE. THE AUTHOR LEFT THE FOLLOWING NOTE ON HIS SITE: R. J. Riggins email meUse or repost at your pleasure, just leave my name on it, please. Here is the article:Koalas They live only in Australia. Their diet is so restricted--to a few subspecies of eucalyptus--that they're threatened now by destruction of the only kinds of trees they will eat. It's also hard to imagine them migrating. Over many generations they might slowly spread through an area--but travelers, they ain't. And when they did migrate over 9,000 miles, in a tiny herd from Ararat to New South Wales, eating a convenient trail of long-disappeared eucalyptus (which took how many years after the Flood to grow?), they left no trail of koala fossils behind. A suggestion for creation "researchers": instead of wasting endless hours combing through the writings of real scientists to find phrases to yank out of context that make them seem to doubt evolution--instead of that, put together a real research expedition! Find us that bee-line trail from northern Turkey to Australia. Find us those fossilized eucalyptus leaves, koala footprints, and koala bones. While you're at it, it would be lovely if you turned up a few kangaroos, giant moas, marsupial lions, Tasmanian wolves, and platypuses along that superhighway to the South Pacific. WOW! Now that you've seen all this, still believe? thank you
|
|||||||||||||||||||
quicksink Inactive Member |
why is it that my posts are not appearing right away? I am a little frustrated.
sorryand thank you
|
|||||||||||||||||||
quicksink Inactive Member |
The biblical flood is a myth, just like the tower of babble and santa claus.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
quicksink Inactive Member |
Thanks for the clarification! i get it now
|
|||||||||||||||||||
quicksink Inactive Member |
doctrbill
are you a creationist or evolutionist just curious
|
|||||||||||||||||||
quicksink Inactive Member |
quote: REPONSE: Somehow I doubt that you cannot prove that god intervened. After all, you can't PROVE that god made the great flood (if it existed). I think that you don't want to defend it all, as it is such nonsense. Today we have interplanetary missions. the votagers are beyond Pluto. When's god going to stop those? quote: RESPONSE: TC- you can't have it both ways. If you defend creationism, you are falsifying evolution. The two simply cannot exist. So if you're hear to defend creationism, you better be ready to push evolution back.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
quicksink Inactive Member |
Dendrochronology
That means tree-ring counting. Dendrochronologists, by matching patterns in annual growth rings, can establish a sequence in living, dead, and long-dead trees in certain areas of the world. That can be a very reliable dating technique for, say, a beam used in an ancient shelter. But this archeological specialty must be completely useless and unreliable, since in some areas ring sequences extend back through the supposed date of the Flood, showing no evidence of same, and indeed way past the usual young-Earth creation date. One of the conundrums of creationism is that the Earth was apparently created complete with evidence of a past that never happened, including tree rings, other annual layering phenomena, fossils already in the ground, and light from distant stars already most of the way here--revealing cosmic events that never really happened! R.J. Riggins I think the creationists will have a fun time with this.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
quicksink Inactive Member |
i'm gonna throw this quiry out just for the heck of it... why is it that the surface of the planet is not covered in radomly deposited boulders...
oh right... it was the neo-nazi-evilutionists that have destroyed the evidence in their ongoing plot to dominate world schools, governments, and corporations... i'm afraid...
|
|||||||||||||||||||
quicksink Inactive Member |
i think you misunderstood... we shouldn't see discreet evidence... we should see very clear and widespread evidence. we should see bpuulders covering all parts of the planet.
i know i may be crazy, but something's tellin me that a flood that covered the entire surface of the earth in water within a period of 40 days would leave at least SOMETHING for the scientists to work with. if only we could bypass those hidden headquarters of the evolutionist society... then we would know the truth... ps- if there are unexplainable boulders, does that mean that it had to come from the flood? judging by the fact that we don't find these unexplainable boulders all over the planet, i think it's safe to assume that these rocks were deposited through a scientifically sound method... pss- can you tell me how the flood could have fossilized only primitive creatures in a flawless strata (one where the most primitive animals are found deeper?) please don't use the old "the intelligent animals ran to higher ground" argument...
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024