The Flood = many coincidences

In other words, magic aka bullshit.

---

There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969Since Evolution is only ~90% correct it should be thrown out and replaced by Creation which has even a lower % of correctness. W T Young, 2008

One liner with no contributions to the discussion - 24 hour suspension coming up.Adminnemooseus

---

quote:

---

The flood was total fiction.

​

The early geologists, pretty much all creationists, gave up trying to document the flood just about 200 years ago. They searched for evidence of the flood and instead they found evidence that it never happened.

​

Things have just gotten worse for flood advocates since then.

​

I've found evidence myself that disproves the biblical flood story. Want to hear about it?

---

I would be interested in hearing it.

Here is an absolute refutation that the Biblical Flood ever happened (unless of course, God is the kind of person that fakes data and evidence).Edited by jar, : tone down the indictment of the God

---

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

quote:

---

Contrair... To me it is quite obvious that geologists truly lack understanding of the power of volcanism. Moreover, your akin lack very basic understandings of mechanics and physics. This deficient understanding of very basic scientific principals shows me how gullible folk are in your field, perhaps due to lack of a backbone and it’s addiction to pathetic theories that are non-scientific. Oh, the earth has plates and they bash ‘n crash into each other at /year. Absolutely pathetic. Plate tectonics is nothing but THE largest pile of scientific excrement that the entire scientific community has swallowed due to its blindness and whimsical ideas that continents float about the earth and rearrange themselves like a Rubix cube. What a joke.

​

Your plate tectonic science is worthless. All you guys have to do is put together some BS writing and say blah blah blahplate tectonics.blah blah blahtectonic plates. Get a little clap from your peers at a GSA conference and your ‘good’ to go. Never mind HOW rocks are stacked Nooo, stay away from the power needed to do so, don’t touch that with a 10 foot pole because it will destroy everything in its path.

---

Now that the rant is over, how can you logically deny all the evidence for plate tectonics? Please don't hyperlink me to some other creationists viewpoint or copy & paste what someone else has said on the subject. Please in your own words show me logically why the the tectonic theory is wrong citing sources as necessary to back up your claims. Because right now all you sound like is an immature child that just responded with the equivalent of "Nuh uh!".Do you honestly believe scientists just make things up, everyone claps and pats the guy on back saying "Way to go brother, yet another reason to not believe in god!". Or maybe just maybe the scientific community is a little bit more than just a bunch of frat boys making crap up to justify their beliefs? Do you know how the scientific community greeted this notion of plates floating on around the earth? I can tell you it wasn't with open arms and surely hasn't been given full acceptance.

quote:

---

Here is an absolute refutation that the Biblical Flood ever happened (unless of course, God is a liar and a cheat).

---

I like that line of reasoning but for the most part it will be ignored. In my experience anything that happens to crush a particular hypothesis (I won't dilute the word theory) is immediately ignored or pushed aside by creationists. I can almost hear Orwell spinning in his grave when creationists are the ones saying how evolutionists are the liars and the ones that ignore the evidence.Anyway, sorry I digressed.

It is effective because it removes almost all of their rabbit hole excuses. It eliminates any imagined pre-flood environment, evolution, radiometric dating, fountains of the deep, vapor canopies, catastrophic plate tectonics, volcanoes or leprechauns. The ONLY assumption in the refutation is that the Flood happened as described in the Bible.And yes, of course they ignore it, deny it, run away when it is presented, change the subject...

---

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

At an archaeological site I tested a few years back we encountered a skeleton which radiocarbon dating shows is over 5,300 years of age (i.e., pre-"flood").The mtDNA from that individual matched living individuals in the same area, showing at minimum they were from the same lineage.This shows that there was no break in the mtDNA haplotype at about 4,350 years ago, the time ascribed to the flood by most biblical scholars.Other researchers have found the same thing in other areas, including one such lineage connection spanning about 10,300 years.This evidence alone shows there was no global flood at the time suggested by most biblical scholars.Of course there are hundreds of other lines of evidence showing the same thing, but this one is one from my own research.

---

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

Playing devil's advocate here: Everybody alive today is supposedly descended from Noah, so doesn't the mtDNA evidence just show that that individual was also in the lineage of Noah? (Of course, it would be quite a coincidence if every find from before the flood was in the lineage of Noah.)

---

Life is like a Hot Wheels car. Sometimes it goes behind the couch and you can't find it.

Native American mtDNA lineages are distinct from those in the Middle East. Geneticists have worked out the divisions and subdivisions of the different haplogroups and haplotypes since modern man left Africa.These Native American haplogroups developed from Asian groups in Beringia about 15,000 years ago, and subsequently spread to the rest of North and South America.They are thus only distantly related to Middle Eastern types, and the split can be shown to have occurred many thousands of years ago.

---

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

Okay. Good. I was wondering if you were just going with the coincience aspect but I see that there are multiple lines of argument.

---

Life is like a Hot Wheels car. Sometimes it goes behind the couch and you can't find it.

RE plate techtonics.
As with any scientific theory the proof of the pudding is in the predictive capability.
If plate techtonics is correct then we have a number of things which follow:
a) We would need to see plate boundaries. Checkb) We would need to see that such plate boundaries and see diverging or converging points to either side. Check - many measurements of spreading have been made at plate boundaries.c) We would expect the crust near such boundaries to be very young in geological terms. check.d) We would expect to see very similar geology at sites which were formerly connected but have since 'spread'. Check.
e) We would expect to see fossil distributions consistent in time and space with the theory. CheckWe could continue and mention the Palaeomagnetic evidence which is also completely consistent with the theory, not to mention the satellite imaging which actually shows the process taking place: but one doubts that any true believer will be convinced by evidence alone.

quote:

---

Take a large piece of basalt, place it under a compression piston, and note what happens.it crumbles.play tectonics does not work.

---

Appeal to ignorance is itself ignorant. Take some custard powder in a 60% solution and compress it quickly - it acts as a solid. Therefore, using this logic, cornflour is a solid material resistant to compression. That would be news to anyone making a cake....Edited by Bikerman, : No reason given.

***Please in your own words show me logically why the the tectonic theory is wrong***Obviously you have not been paying any attention to my posts re the bunk plate tectonic theory. So perhaps I can sum things up for you (and for everyone else that is having difficulties with the fact that the plate tectonic theory is the high priest of junk science).Here are the main points:1) Movement. Or lack thereof.
2) Movement. Or lack thereof.
3) Movement. Or lack thereof.
4) Energy. Or lack thereof.
5) Brittleness. The present state of surface rocks (they are no longer in their plastic form).
6) Massive dessication/contraction. The present state of crustal formations.
7) Sedimentation. Movement of plates will not create sedimentary rocks. Period.
8) Volcanism. The evidence of massive volcanism everywhere negates geological features being formed by irrational plate movement, which is nil.
9) The Mid-Ocean Ridges are not ridiculous spreading centers.
10) The plate tectonic theory is the Joke of Geology and is making Earth scientists look like a herd of dumb-asses sucking on a giant Plate Tectonic pacifier entertaining the preposterous idea that a continent was high-tailing it the wrong way down a one-way street and slammed into another continent...Points 1-3 should be obvious. The laughable, pathetic joke of claimed mm/yr movement of plates is evidence enough that the theory is a farce. Its quite simple; NO movement = NO dynamics = NO energy to create geological features. Period. And mm/yr. movement in any direction is negligible.The very fact that surface rocks are brittle also negates movement. Surface rocks were deposited volcanically and aqueously, as well as a combination of both. Therefore the energy behind placement of rocks was indeed volcanic (as well as debris flow). Take any rock, sedimentary or igneous, and crush it, and they crumble. Therefore rocks no doubt were in their plastic form when deposited and are now dried and have contracted, stratified and are cracked and whacked. Is this process as result of a geology plate crash nursery rhyme at 5cm/year? Hardly. The deposition process of rocks is complete, and the smoke has cleared. And when the deposition process is taking place, the picnic is over — fish become fossils.The gaping hole in the sinking plate tectonic ship is the wimsilcal idea of sea-floor spreading. Scientists are misreading the MOR formation (not to mention that assigning spreading rates to the MOR’s is nothing but a mental exercise of futility). In other words, the forms read compression and not spreading. The fact that transform faults are a result of compressional shear negates any spreading idea, thus stopping the spreading scenario in its tracks. The reason earth scientists want the MOR’s to be spreading is to uphold the idea of Pangea breaking up ~200 million years ago. Pangea is not observed and can only be discussed on a very hypothetical level, YET it is indeed needed by evolutionists in order to support an old earth.Of course the PT theory was scoffed to begin with and rightfully so. But the spreading idea took hold and thus supported Pangea and evolution itself. Pangea is based on the childish idea of S. America cuddling up with Africa several moons ago. Yet the bathymetry of the coastlines of each Continent reveals that they DON’T (or didn’t) fit together like a kindergarten puzzle due to the submerged (and destroyed) landforms. But, geologists have duped themselves over their own cartoon diagrams of Pangea thus it is a psychological fact in the mind of those who profess this as science. Hence, the ocean crust is only ~200 million years old while the continents are billions of years old. And this is a fact as stated by the USGS, National Geographic, NOAA, and pretty much every other major scientific institution which inevitably will end up being the plate tectonic albatross around their necks sinking everyone of them into the pit of pseudo-scientific la-la-land.NO sea-floor spreading = NO plate tectonics = NO Pangea 200 million years ago = NO old Earth = No evolution. Simple. And since this epiphany of plate tectonics not even existing is extremely traumatic for most, shall I will offer my architectural services for help?

I have one comment from your post re "proof" of play... excuse me... plate tectonics.The "examples" you display are nothing but diagrams based on assumptions. Thus you and many others are utterly DUPED BY THE DIAGRAMS.

We must thank God that we have an expert like Architect-426, to point out that people spend so many years of their lives studying and working in geology only to end up as clueless idiots.Moose