Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Evidence for a recent flood
Coyote
Member (Idle past 2105 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


(3)
Message 31 of 404 (637523)
10-16-2011 10:45 AM
Reply to: Message 27 by Portillo
10-16-2011 4:19 AM


Problems
If a flood occurred, what would you expect to find? Billions of dead things, which we call fossils, laid down by water all over the world. And what do we find? Billions of dead things, which we call fossils, laid down by water all over the world.
One problem with this scenario is that these fossils are spread over a billion or so years; they are far from being the same age.
Another problem is that we can see evolution in the fossils. These layers of different ages show a progression of critters from older to younger. This progression had to take a lot of time to develop.
Also, floods don't produce fossils. Shellfish fossils are produced in oceans, and sometimes lakes or marshes. The most a flood could do is move a fossil. Ignoring the two problems above, what are the odds that the fossils could be ripped up from their original locations and sorted out by time and type in their new locations by chaotic flood waters?

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by Portillo, posted 10-16-2011 4:19 AM Portillo has not replied

  
Nuggin
Member (Idle past 2492 days)
Posts: 2965
From: Los Angeles, CA USA
Joined: 08-09-2005


(3)
Message 32 of 404 (637543)
10-16-2011 12:42 PM
Reply to: Message 27 by Portillo
10-16-2011 4:19 AM


If a flood occurred, what would you expect to find? Billions of dead things, which we call fossils, laid down by water all over the world. And what do we find? Billions of dead things, which we call fossils, laid down by water all over the world.
When floods occur, they kill everything that can not get away. They sweep all the dead things downhill to form giant piles of dead things.
Those dead things are not sorted.
If you flood Upstate New York, you are going to get dead people, dogs, cats, horses, cows, deer, coyotes, raccoons, mice, rats, snakes etc. All the things in the environment.
When we look at fossil beds we do not see a vast collection of "everything". We see certain groups of things clustered together and then other groups of things clustered together in different strata.
If "The Flood" were to occur, we'd expect to find elephants AND mammoths AND mastadons AND rabbits AND T-Rex AND zebras all in one big piles.
We never find that. Ever.
So, unless "The Flood" included magic sorting water, your claim just doesn't.... carry water.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by Portillo, posted 10-16-2011 4:19 AM Portillo has not replied

  
Pressie
Member
Posts: 2103
From: Pretoria, SA
Joined: 06-18-2010


Message 33 of 404 (637588)
10-17-2011 12:31 AM
Reply to: Message 29 by Dr Adequate
10-16-2011 7:26 AM


If a flood occurred, what would you expect to find? Billions of dead things, which we call fossils, laid down by water all over the world.
There's lots of areas all over the world with no fossils at all. Therefore, those fossils are not all over the world. Therefore, no such flood.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by Dr Adequate, posted 10-16-2011 7:26 AM Dr Adequate has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 37 by Dr Adequate, posted 10-17-2011 4:15 AM Pressie has replied

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 34 of 404 (637591)
10-17-2011 1:21 AM
Reply to: Message 18 by Coyote
10-14-2011 4:09 PM


Re: What's expected?
Hi Coyote,
Coyote writes:
That much water moving around will leave evidence.
The tide at the Bay of Fundy rises 50 feet and falls 50 feet every 12 hours and 13 minutes. It don't wash everything away nor does it leave a lot of evidence it has been there.
You can find information about it Here.

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by Coyote, posted 10-14-2011 4:09 PM Coyote has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 35 by Nuggin, posted 10-17-2011 3:06 AM ICANT has replied
 Message 36 by Pressie, posted 10-17-2011 3:15 AM ICANT has replied

  
Nuggin
Member (Idle past 2492 days)
Posts: 2965
From: Los Angeles, CA USA
Joined: 08-09-2005


Message 35 of 404 (637598)
10-17-2011 3:06 AM
Reply to: Message 34 by ICANT
10-17-2011 1:21 AM


Re: What's expected?
The tide at the Bay of Fundy rises 50 feet and falls 50 feet every 12 hours and 13 minutes. It don't wash everything away nor does it leave a lot of evidence it has been there.
First of all, OF COURSE it leaves evidence.
Second, one small area with one 50 ft tide is NOT the same thing as the ENTIRE earth under a MILE+ of water EVERYWHERE on the surface at the SAME time.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by ICANT, posted 10-17-2011 1:21 AM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 41 by ICANT, posted 10-17-2011 10:11 AM Nuggin has replied

  
Pressie
Member
Posts: 2103
From: Pretoria, SA
Joined: 06-18-2010


Message 36 of 404 (637599)
10-17-2011 3:15 AM
Reply to: Message 34 by ICANT
10-17-2011 1:21 AM


Re: What's expected?
The tide at the Bay of Fundy rises 50 feet and falls 50 feet every 12 hours and 13 minutes. It don't wash everything away.....
Who said it would wash everything away?
... nor does it leave a lot of evidence it has been there. You can find information about it Here.
It does leave a lot of evidence. Things like mud flats and tidal marshes. You can find information about it here.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by ICANT, posted 10-17-2011 1:21 AM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 44 by ICANT, posted 10-17-2011 10:58 AM Pressie has replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 37 of 404 (637601)
10-17-2011 4:15 AM
Reply to: Message 33 by Pressie
10-17-2011 12:31 AM


There's lots of areas all over the world with no fossils at all. Therefore, those fossils are not all over the world. Therefore, no such flood.
I'm fairly sure that should have been addressed to Portillo.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 33 by Pressie, posted 10-17-2011 12:31 AM Pressie has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 38 by Pressie, posted 10-17-2011 8:45 AM Dr Adequate has not replied
 Message 39 by Panda, posted 10-17-2011 8:52 AM Dr Adequate has not replied

  
Pressie
Member
Posts: 2103
From: Pretoria, SA
Joined: 06-18-2010


Message 38 of 404 (637628)
10-17-2011 8:45 AM
Reply to: Message 37 by Dr Adequate
10-17-2011 4:15 AM


Yes, your'e right. it was addressed to Portillo.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by Dr Adequate, posted 10-17-2011 4:15 AM Dr Adequate has not replied

  
Panda
Member (Idle past 3712 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010


Message 39 of 404 (637629)
10-17-2011 8:52 AM
Reply to: Message 37 by Dr Adequate
10-17-2011 4:15 AM


(This was intended for Pressie. Sorry Dr. A.)
Pressie writes:
There's lots of areas all over the world with no fossils at all. Therefore, those fossils are not all over the world. Therefore, no such flood.
I feel that the words were too vague/general to successfully critique in that way.
e.g.
There are flowers all over my lawn - but my lawn is not 100% covered in flowers.
This 'wiggle room' will allowed the statement to be 'adjusted' whenever someone tries to pin it down.
Edited by Panda, : No reason given.
Edited by Panda, : No reason given.

If I were you
And I wish that I were you
All the things I'd do
To make myself turn blue

This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by Dr Adequate, posted 10-17-2011 4:15 AM Dr Adequate has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 40 by Pressie, posted 10-17-2011 9:49 AM Panda has replied

  
Pressie
Member
Posts: 2103
From: Pretoria, SA
Joined: 06-18-2010


Message 40 of 404 (637635)
10-17-2011 9:49 AM
Reply to: Message 39 by Panda
10-17-2011 8:52 AM


Not at all. Let's have a look at the original statement from Portillo. Split by me.
Portillo writes:
If a flood occurred, what would you expect to find?
In one big global flood occurring at the same time all over the world, covering the entire world in water, I would expect to find at least one stratum of sedimentary deposits with comparative characteristics that covers the entire world. From pole to pole. It would contain unsorted debris all in one layer. In laymen's terms, all mixed up.
Portillo writes:
Billions of dead things, which we call fossils, laid down by water all over the world.
In one global flood, yip, all over the world. Everywhere. No sequence of deposition involved. All mixed up. No layering involved.
Portillo writes:
And what do we find?
The fossiliferous sediments don't occur all over the world. Where they do occur, they occur containing very distinctive sequences of fossils from bottom to top. All occurring in very distinguishable strata. The exact opposite of what you would expect from one global flood.
Portillo writes:
Billions of dead things, which we call fossils, laid down by water all over the world.
We don't find that at all. For example, what about all those fossils not laid down in strata deposited by water? All those fossils in pyroclastic deposits, for example. No global flood involved.
The areas covered by fossiliferous sediments are small compared to the areas not covered by them, anyway.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 39 by Panda, posted 10-17-2011 8:52 AM Panda has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 43 by Panda, posted 10-17-2011 10:37 AM Pressie has not replied

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 41 of 404 (637637)
10-17-2011 10:11 AM
Reply to: Message 35 by Nuggin
10-17-2011 3:06 AM


Re: What's expected?
Hi Nuggin,
Nuggin writes:
First of all, OF COURSE it leaves evidence.
What evidence does it leave?
When the tide comes in the rivers run backwards and the water rises. When the tide goes out the flow is reversed.
Very little changes take place from one tide to the other and this has been going on for ages.
The water rose and fell only once during the flood of Noah.
Nuggin writes:
Second, one small area with one 50 ft tide is NOT the same thing as the ENTIRE earth under a MILE+ of water EVERYWHERE on the surface at the SAME time.
Where does the Bible say the earth was under a MILE+ of water?
It does say the highest hills were covered with 15 cubits of water. Gen. 7:20 Depending on what unit for a cubit is used that ranges from 21.875 feet to 25.75 feet of water over the highest point on the land mass at that time.
Since we don't know the elevation of the land mass at that time there is no way of knowing how much water was required to cover the land mass.
According to the text there was one land mass and one body of water at the time of the flood of Noah. The land mass did not look like it does today. So the writers wrote from their point of view and knowledge of the earth at the time of their writing.
I think I need to go ahead and start a Bible study of exactly what the Bible says about the flood of Noah.
I will do that as time premits.
God Bless,

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 35 by Nuggin, posted 10-17-2011 3:06 AM Nuggin has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 42 by jar, posted 10-17-2011 10:17 AM ICANT has replied
 Message 55 by Nuggin, posted 10-17-2011 11:50 AM ICANT has not replied
 Message 57 by Coragyps, posted 10-17-2011 12:48 PM ICANT has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 393 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 42 of 404 (637639)
10-17-2011 10:17 AM
Reply to: Message 41 by ICANT
10-17-2011 10:11 AM


Re: What's expected?
icant writes:
Since we don't know the elevation of the land mass at that time there is no way of knowing how much water was required to cover the land mass.
What makes you think that we do not know the elevation of the mountains at that time?

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 41 by ICANT, posted 10-17-2011 10:11 AM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 45 by ICANT, posted 10-17-2011 11:04 AM jar has replied

  
Panda
Member (Idle past 3712 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010


Message 43 of 404 (637642)
10-17-2011 10:37 AM
Reply to: Message 40 by Pressie
10-17-2011 9:49 AM


Pressie writes:
In one big global flood occurring at the same time all over the world, covering the entire world in water, I would expect to find at least one stratum of sedimentary deposits with comparative characteristics that covers the entire world. From pole to pole. It would contain unsorted debris all in one layer. In laymen's terms, all mixed up.
Pressie writes:
In one global flood, yip, all over the world. Everywhere. No sequence of deposition involved. All mixed up. No layering involved.
Although this might be correct - it is not what Portillo said.
You have added lots of detail (which I expect Portillo did not have).
Pressie writes:
We don't find that at all. For example, what about all those fossils not laid down in strata deposited by water? All those fossils in pyroclastic deposits, for example. No global flood involved.
Fossils found in volcanic strata do not invalidate the fossils found in flood strata.
A flood would leave fossils - these are seen. Other fossils are irrelevent.
(NB: I am playing devil's advocate).
IMHO: Portillo's statement is true but only in a trivial/general sense.
It can only be shown to be wrong if he supplies some meat to his statement.
As it currently stands it is as true as saying
"If unicorns existed then what would you expect to find? Hoof prints. And what do we find? Hoof prints."
Clearly this is true, but it doesn't differentiate between unicorns and the much evidenced horses.
Edited by Panda, : No reason given.

If I were you
And I wish that I were you
All the things I'd do
To make myself turn blue

This message is a reply to:
 Message 40 by Pressie, posted 10-17-2011 9:49 AM Pressie has not replied

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 44 of 404 (637647)
10-17-2011 10:58 AM
Reply to: Message 36 by Pressie
10-17-2011 3:15 AM


Re: What's expected?
Hi Pressie,
Pressie writes:
It does leave a lot of evidence. Things like mud flats and tidal marshes. You can find information about it here.
But the mud flats are there when the tide is in and is still there when the tide is out.
They have been there all the time that the tide has rose and fell 50 feet.
The water of the flood of Noah rose one time over a period of 40 days and 40 nights and stayed 110 days before it began to return from off the Earth which took another 150 days.
So if the water rose over a 40 day period to cover the highest point on the land mass how much did the water have to rise?
If the water rose as much as it does in the bay of fundy on each tide over a period of 40 days the water would rise 4.000 feet.
How high was the highest point above sea level on the land mass at the time of the flood of Noah?
No one knows how high that point was. Guesses can be made and assertions can be made. But the facts are missing.
God Bless,

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by Pressie, posted 10-17-2011 3:15 AM Pressie has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 46 by New Cat's Eye, posted 10-17-2011 11:05 AM ICANT has replied
 Message 48 by rueh, posted 10-17-2011 11:10 AM ICANT has replied
 Message 50 by Coyote, posted 10-17-2011 11:14 AM ICANT has replied
 Message 58 by Pressie, posted 10-17-2011 4:33 PM ICANT has not replied

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 45 of 404 (637650)
10-17-2011 11:04 AM
Reply to: Message 42 by jar
10-17-2011 10:17 AM


Re: What's expected?
Hi jar,
jar writes:
What makes you think that we do not know the elevation of the mountains at that time?
Because you don't even know when that time was.
You only have guesses and assertions. No facts.
God Bless,

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 42 by jar, posted 10-17-2011 10:17 AM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 47 by jar, posted 10-17-2011 11:09 AM ICANT has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024