The Flood

Ballard claims there's evidence of human habitation such as structural remains 300' below shore level of the Black Sea.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW ---- Jesus said, "When these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads, for your redemption draws near." Luke 21:28

LOL. Don't hold your breath on reactivation of research. Perhaps as NJ has alluded, they are dragging their feet on this since it likely would require a complete overhaul/retooling of their long standing science on flood geology and to admit that all along the Biblical flood history may have some science supportive of it.This is what I've been saying about the Wyatt ship/boat sight and the coral encased chariot wheels at the relatively shallow region of the Gulf of Aqaba/Biblical Red Sea. Where are the mainline secularist scientists who should be out there to ether establish or refute this alleged evidence? They appear to have no interest whatsoever in jeopardizing their agenda driven science so deeply entrenched into mainline science academia.If it were anything even remotely supportive of evolution they would be on it ASAP bigtime.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW ---- Jesus said, "When these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads, for your redemption draws near." Luke 21:28

I am aware that Dr. Baumgardner has rejected the Wyatt ark site based on tests which appear to be in conflict with those of Wyatt which are less sophisticated. However, one must understand that Baumgardner is an ICR board member and closely associated with ICR (Institute for Creation Research.) One must understand that ICR has for years before the Wyatt discovery, conducted expensive and extensive expeditions of their own up near the top of Mt Aarat itself, insisting that the arch is up there. They also would need to retool their literature and science on this, admitting that a non accredited and unprofessional nobody 7th Day Adventist accomplished what they failed in.I've been generally supportive of ICR, but I beg to differ with them on this and some other science they are teaching their students. I have corresponded with them on this Wyatt stuff and their answers are usually short and non-substantive as to refuting the ark site.DISCLAIMER: The above is not to say that I hold to all of Wyatt's claims regarding the site or his science. Having listened intently to both sides, attending a lecture by Wyatt on his expeditions with slides, having viewed David Fassold's video on the site which was a non-biased overview of the discovery et al, I have come to take the position that the site is not the ship itself, but an impression of the right dimensions and shape of the ark which has long since rotted into the terrain. Of course then there's those corroborating 13 or so boyancy ballast stones some of which have Biblical supportive inscriptions carved into them by local herdsmen inhabitants sometime in the past and the Biblical text which places the resting place in the hills of Aarat and not on the mountain itself.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW ---- Jesus said, "When these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads, for your redemption draws near." Luke 21:28

1. Because their hypothesis is being challenged and debated widely.2. Because it is alleged evidence relative to the Black Sea exploration mainline science has done.3. Because it has to do with flood geology just as excavation of other ancient sites has to do with ancient history in determination of what happened in the past.4. Because other Biblical claims which were once thought to be bogus have been found to be accurate, lending corroboration supportive (I say 'supportive') to Biblical historicity.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW ---- Jesus said, "When these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads, for your redemption draws near." Luke 21:28

My statements were a forthright fair and balanced across the board/isle opinion that both Biblicalist creos and secular scientists were deeply entrenched into their own science regarding the discoveries of Wyatt, the nobody freelance researcher and expeditionist. Imo, their positions were pretty much equally agenda driven due to the upheavel such a change in their position would pose so far as what they had entrenched themselves into over many years. To find something better would mean scrapping a whole lot of literature and work they had invested great amounts on energy and expense into.

I don't know if they're conspiracys. Their agenda interests override their willingness to do the science of research on what doesn't support their agenda. I think they really have themselves convinced of their own agendas to the point that their minds are closed to rival hypotheses.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW ---- Jesus said, "When these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads, for your redemption draws near." Luke 21:28

Hi Obvious Child. You bring up some reasonable points. There have been research done and evidence produced. Biblical floodists apply the research and evidence regarding the Black Sea as supportive to the Biblical account. It's just that we interpret the evidence differently than secularists do. I believe it was NJ who questioned how so much water could do so much in one region. Gravity does not allow water to pile up. It must apply to the entire planet. We also have research and evidence with the chariot wheels at Aqaba along with the corroborating evidence in the region supportive to the Biblical historical account that this is the region to which the Biblical account applies.
. LOL on changing science. I've already provided reasons for this. What is reasonable evidence has a lot to do what ones views are as to what is evidence and what is reasonable. By definition miracle implies illimination of some natural factors for the event to happen: For example, guidance of animals into the ark.I don't believe the heat problem has been soundly refuted since the properties and arragement of the atmosphere in such a canopy preflood model would be unknown.

Since several members raised the same point I'll address a point or two as a general response. Some of you people are acting as though I'm trying to allege that Biblical floodists have proof of the Genesis flood. Of course that's not it at all. All I'm saying is that any evidence, regardless of quantity which lends support to Biblical flood is evidence. For example, the Black Sea discoveries do lend support to a significant phenomenal flood which the Genesis Flood certainly was. By the same token that you folks are chiding me, science has yet to prove that the amount of water to do the Black Sea thing did not affect the whole planet. Nor has it been empirically proven that those millions of sea life fossils in the high Rockies et al did not get there via Genesis flood tectonics.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW ---- Jesus said, "When these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads, for your redemption draws near." Luke 21:28

I see nothing empirical there Jar: too many assumptions. Until your argument becomes soundly imperical, we have a viable debate.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW ---- Jesus said, "When these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads, for your redemption draws near." Luke 21:28

Until someone empirically refutes the canopy hypothesis it has not been empirically falsified. There's too many unknowns to say empirically that "this is how it had to be."

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW ---- Jesus said, "When these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads, for your redemption draws near." Luke 21:28

I'm not trying to argue that the Black Sea had anything to do with Genesis. I said the amount of water for that event may be regarded as evidence for a great flood of some great magnitude. You need to read me more carefully before responding. I've gone into this before in other threads but in all of the layers of the atmosphere and all that could have changed it's just too vast to be able to come to any concrete conclusion on the heat factor. 1. You are aware of micro-evo, I assume.2. Baumgardner is not the last word on anything though I agree with much of what he claims.

Call it what you wish. The fact remains that it's not empirically refuted.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW ---- Jesus said, "When these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads, for your redemption draws near." Luke 21:28

I suggest interested folks go to your link and read Faith's responses. (I miss the dear woman.) I think she did quite a sufficient job regardless of the responses to her which were, again, not empirical refutes.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW ---- Jesus said, "When these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads, for your redemption draws near." Luke 21:28

1. The first stages of the flooding likely had somewhat diluted seawater.
2. Likely sealife was scattered via the flood to include the Black Sea.
3. How can we be positive it took a year to flood Black Sea?

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW ---- Jesus said, "When these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads, for your redemption draws near." Luke 21:28

Repetition of your postion does not make it any more substantial than the first time you said it.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW ---- Jesus said, "When these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads, for your redemption draws near." Luke 21:28