Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Noah's Ark volume calculation
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8996
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 106 of 347 (490442)
12-04-2008 2:55 PM
Reply to: Message 105 by Huntard
12-04-2008 2:42 PM


Linked article goes wrong in 2 sentences
You read? ->
quote:
Within hours, mammoths, which could not have lived in today’s Arctic climates or at Arctic latitudes, were buried alive and quickly frozen as this muddy hail fell back to earth in a gigantic hail storm.
It is so obviously silly that I didn't bother to read further.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 105 by Huntard, posted 12-04-2008 2:42 PM Huntard has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 107 by Huntard, posted 12-04-2008 3:09 PM NosyNed has not replied
 Message 108 by bluescat48, posted 12-04-2008 7:18 PM NosyNed has not replied

Huntard
Member (Idle past 2295 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 107 of 347 (490443)
12-04-2008 3:09 PM
Reply to: Message 106 by NosyNed
12-04-2008 2:55 PM


Re: Linked article goes wrong in 2 sentences
Yes I read it now, and also stopped after that point. Seems great minds still think alike.

I hunt for the truth

This message is a reply to:
 Message 106 by NosyNed, posted 12-04-2008 2:55 PM NosyNed has not replied

bluescat48
Member (Idle past 4190 days)
Posts: 2347
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2007


Message 108 of 347 (490452)
12-04-2008 7:18 PM
Reply to: Message 106 by NosyNed
12-04-2008 2:55 PM


Re: Linked article goes wrong in 2 sentences
You read? ->
Within hours, mammoths, which could not have lived in today’s Arctic climates or at Arctic latitudes, were buried alive and quickly frozen as this muddy hail fell back to earth in a gigantic hail storm.
It is so obviously silly that I didn't bother to read further.
Sounds like a poorly written 1950's scifi show.
Edited by bluescat48, : No reason given.

There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002
Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969

This message is a reply to:
 Message 106 by NosyNed, posted 12-04-2008 2:55 PM NosyNed has not replied

Peg
Member (Idle past 4930 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 109 of 347 (490491)
12-05-2008 3:03 AM
Reply to: Message 95 by Larni
12-04-2008 7:39 AM


Re: How many 'species' on the ark?
i hear you saying there is no evidence of the flood, but what if scientists have found it yet interpret the evidence some other way.
EG: orthodox science teaches that the surface of the earth has been shaped in many places by powerful glaciers during a series of ice ages. But apparent evidence of glacial activity can sometimes be the result of water action. Is it possible that some of the evidence for the Flood is being misread as evidence of an ice age?
the theory of ice ages has changed at times...actually early on they found ice ages at every stage of the geologic history but when they've reexamined the evidence later they rejected many of these ice ages.
formations once identified as glacial moraines have been reinterpreted as beds laid down by mudflows, submarine landslides and turbidity currents: avalanches of turbid water that carry silt, sand and gravel out over the deep-ocean floor
the fossil record is another evidence... the sudden extinction of mammals ... all around the world, species of mammals became extinct. At the same time, there was a sudden change of climate. Tens of thousands of mammoths were killed and quick-frozen in Siberia. This could very well be evidence of a flood that evolutionists dont believe ever happened
so they interpret it another way. They could be wrong !
Edited by Peg, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 95 by Larni, posted 12-04-2008 7:39 AM Larni has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 110 by Larni, posted 12-05-2008 6:01 AM Peg has not replied
 Message 111 by anglagard, posted 12-05-2008 8:13 AM Peg has not replied
 Message 112 by Coyote, posted 12-05-2008 10:20 AM Peg has replied
 Message 113 by Percy, posted 12-05-2008 10:22 AM Peg has not replied
 Message 115 by DrJones*, posted 12-05-2008 4:25 PM Peg has not replied

Larni
Member (Idle past 164 days)
Posts: 4000
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


Message 110 of 347 (490495)
12-05-2008 6:01 AM
Reply to: Message 109 by Peg
12-05-2008 3:03 AM


Re: How many 'species' on the ark?
orthodox science teaches that the surface of the earth has been shaped in many places by powerful glaciers during a series of ice ages. But apparent evidence of glacial activity can sometimes be the result of water action.
Please show me.
Is it possible that some of the evidence for the Flood is being misread as evidence of an ice age?
You have to show that all the evidence can be accounted for by a flood. Otherwise we cannot conclude a world wide flood. And the time frames have to be right.
YOU HAVE YET TO ADDRESS THE ISSUE OF TIME FRAME IN ANY POST TO ME.
the fossil record is another evidence... the sudden extinction of mammals ... all around the world, species of mammals became extinct.
Again with the time frame. Define sudden, please. Is it 1 year; or millions of years?
Tens of thousands of mammoths were killed and quick-frozen in Siberia. This could very well be evidence of a flood that evolutionists dont believe ever happened
How is this evidence of a flood?
All you seem to say is if, if, if. You never ezamine the issue of time frames.
Please address these issues.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 109 by Peg, posted 12-05-2008 3:03 AM Peg has not replied

anglagard
Member (Idle past 837 days)
Posts: 2339
From: Socorro, New Mexico USA
Joined: 03-18-2006


Message 111 of 347 (490505)
12-05-2008 8:13 AM
Reply to: Message 109 by Peg
12-05-2008 3:03 AM


Re: How many 'species' on the ark?
Peg writes:
i hear you saying there is no evidence of the flood, but what if scientists have found it yet interpret the evidence some other way.
The amount of evidence against any global flood in human history is so gargantuan, only a person who denies the common definition of reality could possibly support such a rejection of all geology, most all biology, and a lot of physics, chemistry, linguistics, anthropology, Biblical scholarship and indeed what was once called common sense.
Either virtually all scientists and intellectuals over the last 200 years are liars and/or idiots or the creationist movement is intellectually and spiritually dishonest. Take your pick, but first consider Jesus' admonition to feed the poor and heal the sick.
Here is why Message 1
I am reluctant to bring this up because debating the 100 categories in general lead to a admin nightmare but my hand is forced, so pick one and let loose the logic and science. After that you still have the other 99 to go.
I seriously doubt that as a hard core creationist you can actually follow a link you may be afraid of, please feel free to surprise me.

Read not to contradict and confute, not to believe and take for granted, not to find talk and discourse, but to weigh and consider - Francis Bacon
The more we understand particular things, the more we understand God - Spinoza

This message is a reply to:
 Message 109 by Peg, posted 12-05-2008 3:03 AM Peg has not replied

Coyote
Member (Idle past 2106 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


Message 112 of 347 (490513)
12-05-2008 10:20 AM
Reply to: Message 109 by Peg
12-05-2008 3:03 AM


Interpretations (again)
i hear you saying there is no evidence of the flood, but what if scientists have found it yet interpret the evidence some other way.
That's nonsense. It also appears to be one of the latest creationist talking points.
What it boils down to is that the evidence supports one interpretation, but not the other.
Right now what you are doing is cherry-picking bits and pieces and feeding us "what if" stories. That won't cut it in science. You have to present a scenario, with supporting evidence, that does not contradict one or more established facts. You have not done that. You have just given us about two "what ifs" -- selected ice age glacial features and quick-frozen megafauna.
If you want to propose a global flood, you first have to pick a time frame; having the flood wandering about from 3,000 years ago to the Cambrian is just not going to work. That's not science, that's religious apologetics.
Biblical scholars suggest that the most likely date for the global flood is about 4,350 years ago. Are you willing to accept that date? And stick with it?
If not, what specific date do you propose, and why?
If so, you will have to give up on ice age glaciers and megafauna; both were long gone by then. And don't even consider fossils. They take much longer to form than that.
See what the problem with the flood myth is? If you have to consider all of the evidence it becomes clear that a global flood never happened. Only when you cherry-pick bits and pieces that can be misinterpreted the way you want them to be does the evidence appear to support a global flood. Again, that's not science; that's religious apologetics.

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 109 by Peg, posted 12-05-2008 3:03 AM Peg has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 127 by Peg, posted 12-08-2008 5:44 AM Coyote has not replied

Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 113 of 347 (490514)
12-05-2008 10:22 AM
Reply to: Message 109 by Peg
12-05-2008 3:03 AM


Re: How many 'species' on the ark?
Peg writes:
They could be wrong!
As I said to you in another thread, The argument, "You could be wrong ," is one that can be applied by all sides in all discussions and so has no effective validity. It just draws the retort, "So could you," and then what?
The answer is evidence. Discussions like this should be anchored in evidence. In other words, you should be talking about facts that bear on the topic, which happens to be about the volume of Noah's ark.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 109 by Peg, posted 12-05-2008 3:03 AM Peg has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 114 by bluescat48, posted 12-05-2008 10:49 AM Percy has not replied

bluescat48
Member (Idle past 4190 days)
Posts: 2347
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2007


Message 114 of 347 (490519)
12-05-2008 10:49 AM
Reply to: Message 113 by Percy
12-05-2008 10:22 AM


Re: How many 'species' on the ark?
Now let us take the possibility that the ark existed.
If the volume is as is noted then all current species could not have fit into it.
So either the ark was much lager causing more problems such as seaworthyness
or there were less species at the time which means that superevolution had to have occured in the time post ark, neither seems feasible.

There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002
Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969

This message is a reply to:
 Message 113 by Percy, posted 12-05-2008 10:22 AM Percy has not replied

DrJones*
Member
Posts: 2284
From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Joined: 08-19-2004
Member Rating: 6.8


Message 115 of 347 (490543)
12-05-2008 4:25 PM
Reply to: Message 109 by Peg
12-05-2008 3:03 AM


Re: How many 'species' on the ark?
Tens of thousands of mammoths were killed and quick-frozen in Siberia
Got any documentation of this?

soon I discovered that this rock thing was true
Jerry Lee Lewis was the devil
Jesus was an architect previous to his career as a prophet
All of a sudden i found myself in love with the world
And so there was only one thing I could do
Was ding a ding dang my dang along ling long - Jesus Built my Hotrod Ministry

Live every week like it's Shark Week! - Tracey Jordan
Just a monkey in a long line of kings. - Matthew Good
If "elitist" just means "not the dumbest motherfucker in the room", I'll be an elitist! - Get Your War On
*not an actual doctor

This message is a reply to:
 Message 109 by Peg, posted 12-05-2008 3:03 AM Peg has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 116 by caldron68, posted 12-05-2008 10:51 PM DrJones* has not replied

caldron68
Member (Idle past 3841 days)
Posts: 79
From: USA
Joined: 08-26-2007


Message 116 of 347 (490576)
12-05-2008 10:51 PM
Reply to: Message 115 by DrJones*
12-05-2008 4:25 PM


Re: How many 'species' on the ark?
Does it really matter? Let's step back for a second and take a look at the big picture. The ark was created for a specific purpose, to save a grand total of 8 humans and two of every 'kind' of animal, bird and insect. All the rest of the creatures on the Earth, including every single man, woman and child, yes children, we're sentenced to death by drowning for not turning out exactly as their creator had imagined. Hmmmmm. Imagine that, an omnipotent, omniscient God must destroy his own creation because it didn't turn out exactly as he had envisioned. God created the entire universe by simply speaking the word, but evidently in order to fix what he has already created he must drown everybody before starting over. What does that say about the God described in this story? What did he change about man's behavior after he killed off all those really bad women and children?
So, argue all you want about the ark's attributes or about the 'evidence' for a global flood, just don't forget about that sea of dead bodies that the ark was floating around in.
Cheers
Caldron68

This message is a reply to:
 Message 115 by DrJones*, posted 12-05-2008 4:25 PM DrJones* has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 117 by johnfolton, posted 12-05-2008 11:50 PM caldron68 has not replied

johnfolton 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5591 days)
Posts: 2024
Joined: 12-04-2005


Message 117 of 347 (490577)
12-05-2008 11:50 PM
Reply to: Message 116 by caldron68
12-05-2008 10:51 PM


Re: How many 'kind' on the ark?
two of every 'kind' of animal, bird and insect.
The bible says there were cattle kind, fowl kind, and creeping creature kind. right? akjv genesis 6:20 these are the creatures that came unto Noah , to keep them alive. right? All them other kinds survived on floating debris, swam out the fresh water world flood, etc... right? Is not that what the bible is saying like Noah knew the waters had subsided when an olive tree had new growth. right? Tree's survived because they floated upwards as islands of refuge for all the kinds that survived apart from the ark. right? the word for "only" can mean "nontheless". right? The bible inerrancy is awesome, etc...You can not find even one creature native to Australia that is hoofed due they all perished. right? due non could migrate from Noah's ark to Australia after the flood. No land route available. right?
P.S. Your all trying to put all the different kinds on the ark when the bible is not inferring this at all. right? It just says all the creatures in the earth perished. The fossil record is biblical confirmation of the bibles inerrancy in respect to the world flood that all the creatures that remained in the earth perished. akjv genesis 6:17 right? etc...
Edited by johnfolton, : No reason given.
Edited by johnfolton, : No reason given.
Edited by johnfolton, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 116 by caldron68, posted 12-05-2008 10:51 PM caldron68 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 118 by bluescat48, posted 12-06-2008 1:03 AM johnfolton has replied
 Message 120 by Taz, posted 12-06-2008 2:06 AM johnfolton has replied

bluescat48
Member (Idle past 4190 days)
Posts: 2347
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2007


Message 118 of 347 (490583)
12-06-2008 1:03 AM
Reply to: Message 117 by johnfolton
12-05-2008 11:50 PM


Re: How many 'kind' on the ark?
What verse is this in?
Tree's survived because they floated upwards as islands of refuge for all the kinds that survived apart from the ark. right?
Or is it in the Book of johnfolton?
Edited by bluescat48, : Addition

There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002
Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969

This message is a reply to:
 Message 117 by johnfolton, posted 12-05-2008 11:50 PM johnfolton has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 119 by johnfolton, posted 12-06-2008 1:10 AM bluescat48 has not replied

johnfolton 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5591 days)
Posts: 2024
Joined: 12-04-2005


Message 119 of 347 (490586)
12-06-2008 1:10 AM
Reply to: Message 118 by bluescat48
12-06-2008 1:03 AM


Re: How many 'kind' on the ark?
What verse is this in?
akjv gen 6:17 if so then, etc...Its saying things that survive by the breath of life of flesh perished in the earth. Its also saying things that are in the earth that perished included things that were not flesh if they were in the earth. right? The only way life could survive apart from the ark was aboard things that floated above the surface of the earth. right? A hoofed creature could not of climbed aboard a floating tree nor swam out a world flood. right? Why no native hoof creature in Australia. etc...When you see a flood with cattle usually they are floating dead. right? The bible says they came to Noah to save them. right? verse 20
P.S. Where do you personally believe all the massive coal yards came from along the Rocky mountains buried in sediments. How come less than 6,000 years ago the mighty redwood tree found in all the mighty coal deposits world wide now only are found only in Western side of the America's. The bible has the answer the deluge and the glaciers formed by the flood. The oldest living redwood interestingly is more supporting evidence of the truth and how long ago the biblical flood occured, right?etc....
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
If you do not have an authorized king james version. free download.
e-Sword: Free Bible Study for the PC
Edited by johnfolton, : No reason given.
Edited by johnfolton, : No reason given.
Edited by johnfolton, : No reason given.
Edited by johnfolton, : No reason given.
Edited by johnfolton, : No reason given.
Edited by johnfolton, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 118 by bluescat48, posted 12-06-2008 1:03 AM bluescat48 has not replied

Taz
Member (Idle past 3292 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 120 of 347 (490588)
12-06-2008 2:06 AM
Reply to: Message 117 by johnfolton
12-05-2008 11:50 PM


Re: How many 'kind' on the ark?
johnfolton writes:
All them other kinds survived on floating debris, swam out the fresh water world flood, etc... right?
You must really want to go to the christian hell, since you've intentionally lied right to your god's face about god's own holy words.
Gen 7: 21-23
21 Every living thing that moved on the earth perished”birds, livestock, wild animals, all the creatures that swarm over the earth, and all mankind. 22 Everything on dry land that had the breath of life in its nostrils died. 23 Every living thing on the face of the earth was wiped out; men and animals and the creatures that move along the ground and the birds of the air were wiped from the earth. Only Noah was left, and those with him in the ark.
PS - The size is there to make sure you don't accidently miss those words and keep lying right to god's face about god's own words. I just want salvation for you, that's all.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 117 by johnfolton, posted 12-05-2008 11:50 PM johnfolton has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 121 by johnfolton, posted 12-06-2008 2:27 AM Taz has replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024