|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9163 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,419 Year: 3,676/9,624 Month: 547/974 Week: 160/276 Day: 34/23 Hour: 1/3 |
Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 858 days) Posts: 2339 From: Socorro, New Mexico USA Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: 100 Categories of Evidence Against Noah’s Flood | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
teen4christ Member (Idle past 5820 days) Posts: 238 Joined: |
I'm sorry if we're not allowed to post a vid in a debate thread like this, but I think this particular vid fits in quite well with the current discussion.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rahvin Member Posts: 4039 Joined: Member Rating: 8.2 |
A summary of the video would be nice for those of us at work who can't view videos at the moment.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
teen4christ Member (Idle past 5820 days) Posts: 238 Joined: |
Just read Rrhain's message a couple posts that started with "what weighs more, a ton of feathers or..." for a summary of this vid. Basically, the vid talks about the calculations regarding the rediculously high atmospheric pressure we would have if we have a canopy above the atmosphere pressing down on us and the energy that would vaporize us all when all that water comes down.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
bluegenes Member (Idle past 2498 days) Posts: 3119 From: U.K. Joined: |
Rrhain writes: bluegenes writes:
I know. That's my point. Since we're talking about GLOBAL effects, then the earth is either always flooded or never can be. If there were enough water to flood the earth, then it would be flooded right now. Since it is not flooded, then it is geometrically impossible to do so. Interestingly, a completely smooth earth would always be flooded I know you know. And I agree, unless we magically add water to the system, then subtract it. What I was trying to think up was a way for a flood to become global for a year without addition or subtraction of water to the system. So, the earth would have to be smooth and ocean covered except for one low lying piece of land. Imagine Holland sticking above the surface. Then the earth warms enough to melt the ice caps, then cools during the year to re-form them. However, thinking about it, there would also have to be bumps at the poles, because it is only ice on land that significantly raises sea levels. There would also have to be more ice than there is at present, presumably, as the Greenland and Antarctic ice is worth (I think) about a 400 foot rise in sea levels if it melts now, but in my scenario the ocean has a much larger surface area. Even if this is possible, it doesn't seem to be much use to creationists, as the post flood tectonic plate movement necessary to give us the present lay of the land poses even more problems than the flood. They might take up the idea, though, because the rapid warming of the earth might cause lots of evaporation and rain from above, and the ice melting very quickly might account for the waters from below mentioned in the Bible. Also, just one piece of land makes it much easier for Noah to get all the animals on the Ark. So, maybe I'll start a meme, and we'll see a version of the "great ice melt/smooth earth" theory on Answers In Genesis in a couple of years' time. If so, I'll want some royalties from the T-shirts and crap that they sell.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
1071 Member (Idle past 5833 days) Posts: 61 From: AUSTIN, TX, USA Joined: |
50. Multiple layers of fossil forests - How can a single flood explain multiple fossil forest layers such as can be seen at Joggins, Nova Scotia or Yellowstone? This would be more evidence of Catastrophism rather than Uniformaterianism. Vast forests of polystrate forests fossils, trees running through layers of strata, prove a disastrous flood and mass hydro-logic sorting rather than millions of years of trees standing, slowly being covered by sediment. I mean, what about the trees they find upside down that are polystrate?
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rahvin Member Posts: 4039 Joined: Member Rating: 8.2 |
This would be more evidence of Catastrophism rather than Uniformaterianism. Vast forests of polystrate forests fossils, trees running through layers of strata, prove a disastrous flood and mass hydro-logic sorting rather than millions of years of trees standing, slowly being covered by sediment. I mean, what about the trees they find upside down that are polystrate? Trees do this funny thing called "falling down." Sometimes, they fall down a hill or into a ditch, and can wind up upside down leaning on one side of the hill...which happens to be made of many different rock layers. Over a few hundred more years, the tree is petrified and buried, and we find a fossilized tree upside down sitting amongst many layers of sediment. The sedimentary layers themselves disprove a catastrophic flood: they look exactly like layers we have directly observed being created annually. When you see, for example, annual layers of sediment deposited every year for 50 years making 50 layers from seasonal runoff, it's perfectly reasonable to conclude that the million layers beneath those 50 observed layers that look exactly the same likely were produced over a million years. It's not reasonable to assume that those layers were deposited by a global flood, because the evidence directly contradicts such a model. A conclusion like that would be, in fact, stupid. Unless you can provide an example by which a local flood has been observed to result in layers that look exactly like the layers that scientific models currently show to be created over long timeframes, you're blowing smoke. It's even worse than that, in fact, because you also need a flood that sorts not by density, but rather for some reason consistently places all living, breathing animals of only specific types below stone and metal tools and pottery (which presumably are not only more dense than say, dinosaurs, but also display less aptitude with swimming). I could go on...but really, the polystrata tree argument has been dismantled so many times it's laughable.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Granny Magda Member Posts: 2462 From: UK Joined: Member Rating: 3.8 |
Hi there antiLIE, welcome to EvC.
In addition to what Rhavin has already said, I feel that it is worth pointing out that the usual geologist's explanation for so-called "polystrate" fossils does not involve "millions of years". Such trees were buried relatively quickly, either by rapid subsidence or volcanic activity. The idea that such features are explained by reference to millions of years of gradual, regular sediment deposition is simply untrue. It is a misrepresentation of the geological explanation. If you really are an anti-lie agent, then you should get to work on this one, because it's a real stinker. Edited by Granny Magda, : Changed title. Mutate and Survive
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
1071 Member (Idle past 5833 days) Posts: 61 From: AUSTIN, TX, USA Joined: |
I have seen it first hand. [hydro-logic sorting] Where I live now, there was a very bad flood in 1998. There are layers all over the place down the rivers and the lakes where sediments were lain down by this 1998 flood, then erosion tore away the sides of the river. This can be seen any where the was a bad flood... I also lived in SE TX in 2005 when hurricane Rita hit. After the waters subsided the mud in my yard was in small layers. You can take a jar of water, I did this last week, and fill it full of water and different dirts and sands, shake it up and it will separate the different sediments in to layers. Maybe I am just not seing your point, because rock, sediment and dirt layers to me show a mass amount of water.
Agent antiLIE of the AGDT 7x153=1071 [ IIX:XXIV] ‘ ‘
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
1071 Member (Idle past 5833 days) Posts: 61 From: AUSTIN, TX, USA Joined: |
thank you for the warm welcome, I am very glad to be here.
You are correct.. today we even see the rapid development of petrification of the trees in spirit lake after Mt St Helens blew. But if naturalists see this then why can they not see the bigger picture.. Volcanoes are catastrophes. A devastational world wide flood would have the same results .... world wide. Agent antiLIE of the AGDT 7x153=1071 [ IIX:XXIV] ‘ ‘
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
1071 Member (Idle past 5833 days) Posts: 61 From: AUSTIN, TX, USA Joined: |
the polystrata tree argument has been dismantled so many times it's laughable. actually the the polystrata tree argument dismantling has been dismantled so many times it's laughable. sorry, just had to say that...lol Agent antiLIE of the AGDT 7x153=1071 [ IIX:XXIV] ‘ ‘
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Buzsaw Inactive Member |
Of course, what is considered reliable on the internet is a matter of ideology preference, Paul. Certainly you wouldn't consider anything reliable which counters your POV relative to the flood.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Granny Magda Member Posts: 2462 From: UK Joined: Member Rating: 3.8 |
But if naturalists see this then why can they not see the bigger picture.. Volcanoes are catastrophes. A devastational world wide flood would have the same results .... world wide. Um... What? A flood would have the same effect as a volcano? How exactly? I'm afraid it just sounds ridiculous to me. Mind you, if you're going to claim that we should see effects like the ones at Joggins and Yellowstone from a worldwide flood, then congratulations; you've just proved that the flood never happened, because we don't see these fossils beyond certain small and distinct areas, areas which, incidentally, are always associated with large scale subsidence or volcanism. These areas are scattered across the world, but if they were a result of a global flood, they would be literally everywhere. They would be utterly ubiquitous, not the relative rarities that they are. Mutate and Survive
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rahvin Member Posts: 4039 Joined: Member Rating: 8.2 |
actually the the polystrata tree argument dismantling has been dismantled so many times it's laughable. sorry, just had to say that...lol How funny. Perhaps next time you'd like to say something resembling an argument? perhaps an argument refuting my last post? or perhaps a concession? Id accept that, too.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Buzsaw Inactive Member |
Rrhain writes:
Interestingly, a completely smooth earth would always be flooded bluejeans writes: I know. That's my point. Since we're talking about GLOBAL effects, then the earth is either always flooded or never can be. If there were enough water to flood the earth, then it would be flooded right now. Since it is not flooded, then it is geometrically impossible to do so. bluejeans writes: I know you know. And I agree, unless we magically add water to the system, then subtract it. What I was trying to think up was a way for a flood to become global for a year without addition or subtraction of water to the system. So, the earth would have to be smooth and ocean covered except for one low lying piece of land. Imagine Holland sticking above the surface. Then the earth warms enough to melt the ice caps, then cools during the year to re-form them. However, thinking about it, there would also have to be bumps at the poles, because it is only ice on land that significantly raises sea levels. There would also have to be more ice than there is at present, presumably, as the Greenland and Antarctic ice is worth (I think) about a 400 foot rise in sea levels if it melts now, but in my scenario the ocean has a much larger surface area. Even if this is possible, it doesn't seem to be much use to creationists, as the post flood tectonic plate movement necessary to give us the present lay of the land poses even more problems than the flood. They might take up the idea, though, because the rapid warming of the earth might cause lots of evaporation and rain from above, and the ice melting very quickly might account for the waters from below mentioned in the Bible. Also, just one piece of land makes it much easier for Noah to get all the animals on the Ark. My model does not feature a completely smooth earth. It features a far smoother earth surface than post flood but the mountains would be more like foothills post flood with relatively shallow oceans preflood. BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW. The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rahvin Member Posts: 4039 Joined: Member Rating: 8.2 |
My model does not feature a completely smooth earth. It features a far smoother earth surface than post flood but the mountains would be more like foothills post flood with relatively shallow oceans preflood. Then please provide the mechanism by which a billion years worth of tectonic activity and the raising of mountains and the deepening of oceans is caused by a flood over a period of a year without sterilizing the planet. Saying "a flood can do that" is blatantly false unless you can demonstrate that a local flood has been observed to create similar structures on smaller scales, or at least provide a plausible mechanism by which 40 days of global rain and a massive global flood can do so.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024