Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 66 (9078 total)
94 online now:
dwise1 (1 member, 93 visitors)
Newest Member: harveyspecter
Post Volume: Total: 895,324 Year: 6,436/6,534 Month: 629/650 Week: 167/232 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Describing what the Biblical Flood would be like.
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 149 of 242 (789056)
08-10-2016 6:12 AM
Reply to: Message 117 by Faith
08-04-2016 10:06 AM


Re: Yet one more thing we can say
I didn't say you had to endorse YEC, I wondered how a Christian can simply do away with actual Biblical text.

It is YEC folks who claim that the Bible describes a canopy of water. The Bible actually does not say any such thing. So, yeah, in this case, it is only necessary to dismiss the YEC interpretations. In other situations, folks may question whether the text as written was intended to be interpreted in the literal way that YEC folk are prone to do.

Let's be careful about throwing around accusations that folks "do away with actual Biblical text" the way you do here, particular when the accusation is really intended to classify folks as non-Christian. Despite vigorous disagreements with you regarding what the Bible says, I would not call you a liar simply for expressing your opinion.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King

I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend. Thomas Jefferson


This message is a reply to:
 Message 117 by Faith, posted 08-04-2016 10:06 AM Faith has not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 152 of 242 (789080)
08-10-2016 11:45 AM
Reply to: Message 146 by ICANT
08-10-2016 1:29 AM


Re: Science vs. creation "science"
The assumptions you have to use to begin with.

In particular, which assumptions are those?


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King

I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend. Thomas Jefferson


This message is a reply to:
 Message 146 by ICANT, posted 08-10-2016 1:29 AM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 153 by JonF, posted 08-10-2016 1:54 PM NoNukes has not replied
 Message 156 by ICANT, posted 08-11-2016 1:31 AM NoNukes has not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 157 of 242 (789126)
08-11-2016 2:27 AM
Reply to: Message 154 by ICANT
08-11-2016 1:00 AM


When the water began to rise it would have come on the land mass from all direction at the same time. With the water rising at the rate of 1" per minute there would be little to no damage to the land mass.

The erosion effects would be generated by the water velocity rather than the rate of rise. Your argument that a global flood is just like the tide coming in, even with analogy to Fundy is ridiculous.

Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King

I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend. Thomas Jefferson


This message is a reply to:
 Message 154 by ICANT, posted 08-11-2016 1:00 AM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 165 by ICANT, posted 08-12-2016 1:29 AM NoNukes has replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 166 of 242 (789241)
08-12-2016 1:50 AM
Reply to: Message 165 by ICANT
08-12-2016 1:29 AM


But if you start with a relativity flat elevation and the water is rising from all directions as the sea is rising at 1 " per minute the water would rise like the tide coming in on the beach.

Sigh. Wrong.

The velocity is generated by the water rushing to fill in an area in which there was not water. It is not caused strictly by the water level rising in the ocean, but from a combination of water falling from the sky, and presumably rushing towards the sea, some water coming from the "fountains of the deep" which may or may not be on land or ocean, and the rising of the sea level from a combination of the two. That leaves plenty of opportunity to generate velocity. There is not enough detail in the description in the Bible to set that velocity at either a high or a low level. All we know is that the water levels themselves rose gently. But of course you know better.

Whether the flood waters did or did not carve features such as the grand canyon due to the flow of the flood waters is neither confirmed or denied by the text. Both you and Faith are just guessing.

Even if the Flood was strictly a matter of water rising in level at one inch per minute due to water added only to the ocean, it is still possible that such an increase could result in enormous velocities of water across dry land. To calculate the velocity would involve something like this: Area of land * rate of increase in water level gives the volumetric flow rate. Divide the volumetric flow rate by the perimeter times the unit of height measurement for the height to generate a velocity number. Note that the rate of increase in water level is only one of the factors to be considered, and that the calculation given assumes a completely flat earth.

I say relativity flat as there was no place the plates would have been diving under each other to make the mountain ranges yet.

The Bible says that there were high mountains at the time. Presumably Moses knew what a high mountain was when he wrote Genesis well after the time of the Flood or the "division of the earth" at Peleg, right? But of course you know better.

Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King

I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend. Thomas Jefferson


This message is a reply to:
 Message 165 by ICANT, posted 08-12-2016 1:29 AM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 168 by ICANT, posted 08-12-2016 3:02 AM NoNukes has replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 169 of 242 (789245)
08-12-2016 3:17 AM
Reply to: Message 168 by ICANT
08-12-2016 3:02 AM


I don't understand this statement.

I am the one trying to explain that the rising water would do little damage.

1) I described my position in detail. In essence it is that a gentle rising of levels may cause extensive damage. I don't have anything more to add to it.

2) You have already admitted that your "explaining" includes making assumptions that are not contained or indicated by the Biblical text. Those assumptions are for the sole purpose of coming up with the conclusion that rising water did little damage. But the Bible itself does not tell us that the rising water did little damage. Accordingly, what you call an explanation is simply an exposition on your personal take regarding the flood. If you have some textual support for your position, I'd be interested in seeing that.

ABE:

The Grand Canyon did not exist until at least 100 years after the flood, as the earth was not divided yet.

Says ICANT, the authority on the pre Peleg geography. Was any of the landmass currently known as Africa a part of the initial landmass? How about the continent now known as North America. Was any part of that a portion of the initial landmass? How the heck would you even know that? You make up stuff just as freely as does Faith.

Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King

I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend. Thomas Jefferson


This message is a reply to:
 Message 168 by ICANT, posted 08-12-2016 3:02 AM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 173 by ICANT, posted 08-13-2016 3:15 AM NoNukes has not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 198 of 242 (789623)
08-17-2016 7:30 AM
Reply to: Message 197 by ICANT
08-17-2016 2:57 AM


Re: Science vs. creation "science"
With the two different Hebrew words used in Genesis 10:25 and then in Genesis 11:8, 9 there is no way the text in Genesis 10:25 can be translated as the nations or people being dispersed over the land mass.

Of course it can. The fact that two different words are used does not mean that the same meaning was not meant in both places. It is merely one argument in favor of your position. Arguments against your conclusion include the fact that the Bible does not describe the kind of catastrophic events that might be associated with the rapid movement of contents required under your scenario.

Well I read Genesis in August 1949 and believed the same then as I do now.

I understand. I'm not going to undertake another interminable argument along these lines.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King

I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend. Thomas Jefferson


This message is a reply to:
 Message 197 by ICANT, posted 08-17-2016 2:57 AM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 201 by ICANT, posted 08-19-2016 1:31 AM NoNukes has replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 199 of 242 (789624)
08-17-2016 7:34 AM
Reply to: Message 196 by ICANT
08-17-2016 1:56 AM


Re: Science vs. creation "science"
The force that holds the universe together would have no problem moving them and it would not be magic. I think you would probably call that force dark energy or dark matter.

You think incorrectly.

Again, dark energy and dark matter are not the same thing. Dark energy in particular tends to push the universe apart. We've had this discussion before.

ABE:

But it [the sun] does not appear at the same time each morning.

So what? How does that affect the nature of assumptions? The time of sunrise for any given day can be calculated decades in advance based on assumptions which have been verified by evidence.

Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King

I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend. Thomas Jefferson


This message is a reply to:
 Message 196 by ICANT, posted 08-17-2016 1:56 AM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 202 by ICANT, posted 08-19-2016 1:59 AM NoNukes has replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 204 of 242 (789763)
08-19-2016 3:55 AM
Reply to: Message 202 by ICANT
08-19-2016 1:59 AM


Re: Science vs. creation "science"
I recommend that you look this stuff up instead of guessing. Because your erroneous statements here erode confidence in your ability to state facts in general. If you get everyday stuff that folks can check this wrong, why would anyone believe you when you talk about something we cannot check such as what the Hebrew text of the Bible says.

The sun don't rise.

And?

I did not describe the sun as rising. I referred to the time of sunrise which is the time at which the apparent altitude of the sun's upper limb has increased to be at 0 degrees above the horizon. If you want to argue that the term "sunrise" means that the sun is actually rising rather than apparently rising, what should I understand about your credibility when you talk to me about the meaning of the term "divide".

The earth rotates on it's axis taking 23 hours 56 minutes, and 4 seconds to make a complete rotation.

That is the reason the sun appears at different times.

No that is not even close to an adequate explanation for the sun appearing at different times each day. If your explanation was correct then sunrise would be earlier and earlier each day, eventually over time evolving to have the sun rise at midnight. But that is not what you have observed in Florida or I have observed in North Carolina.

ABE:

Your explanation would apply to distant stars, but not to the sun.
end ABE:

By way of example, the time of sunrise in my location is 6:38 today. Yesterday it was 6:37. Not quite what your explanation would predict.

The reason for the variation in sunrise time has three major components.

1: The earth's tilt causes variation in the length of the day light at different places on the earth at different points on the earth's orbit. When the length of daylight is long, that corresponds to an early sunrise. Short periods of daylight correspond to late sunrises (and early sunsets). The amount of variation depends on your latitude. The earth's tilt also varies slowly over time.

2: The speed of the earth's revolution about the sun varies at different places in the earth's orbit which means that the amount of extra rotation of the earth required to place the sun at the horizon changes throughout the year. This variation affects everybody on earth that observes a sunrise regardless of location.

3: Yes the fact that the sun's rotation is 3.9 minutes short of 24 hours plays no role at all in the explanation. In fact if we removed the earth's tilt and the variation in orbital speed, the length of a solar day would be a constant value just a tiny bit short (about 2 milliseconds) of 24 hours even based on the current definition of one second. I won't bother with that explanation. We've discussed the "leap second" before.

What assumptions are you referring too?

Newton's three laws, theory of gravitation according to Einstein or Newton, known (measured) positions of the earth and all of the planets in their orbits at given times, earth's rotation speed, the speed of light. Verified/observed stuff like that.

Given information of the time above, we can calculate the positions of earth and the solar system planets and the time of their apparent rising and setting at times in the future. I have authored smartphone programs that display the positions of planets and stars for any time between 1900 to 2050 as seen from any place on earth, so I know what is required.

ABE:

Tying this into the topic. The point is that you definition of 'assumption' is pretty peculiar. Even if we accepted your erroneous explanation, there is an underlying assumption that the earth's rotation remains constant over time. Yes, that is what we expect based on Newton's laws of motion, but even those descriptions of physics are assume to apply universally.

Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King

I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend. Thomas Jefferson


This message is a reply to:
 Message 202 by ICANT, posted 08-19-2016 1:59 AM ICANT has not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 205 of 242 (789764)
08-19-2016 3:58 AM
Reply to: Message 203 by ICANT
08-19-2016 2:29 AM


Re: Science vs. creation "science"
The people were separated not divided or split.

How can you even write sentences like that without seeing the readily apparent issue? All three of those English words could easily be used to describe folks being dispersed and forming distinct nations after the incident at Babel. I cannot think of a better way to undercut your own argument.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King

I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend. Thomas Jefferson


This message is a reply to:
 Message 203 by ICANT, posted 08-19-2016 2:29 AM ICANT has not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 206 of 242 (789781)
08-19-2016 9:33 AM
Reply to: Message 201 by ICANT
08-19-2016 1:31 AM


Re: Science vs. creation "science"
See messasge 205.

Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King

I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend. Thomas Jefferson


This message is a reply to:
 Message 201 by ICANT, posted 08-19-2016 1:31 AM ICANT has not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 209 of 242 (789813)
08-20-2016 4:50 AM
Reply to: Message 208 by 14174dm
08-19-2016 12:06 PM


Re: Science vs. creation "science"
What is the exact meaning of the Hebrew word translated as "earth" in the verse? Is it earth as in dirt or earth as in planet? Did the Israelites have a concept of the earth as an object floating in space?

I'm pretty sure it meant just the land. How does that help resolve the controversy?Is it your view that because the term means dirt that that 'divide' is more likely/less likely to mean a splitting into continents? If so, your reasoning is not readily apparent to me.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King

I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend. Thomas Jefferson


This message is a reply to:
 Message 208 by 14174dm, posted 08-19-2016 12:06 PM 14174dm has not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 218 of 242 (790099)
08-25-2016 10:21 AM
Reply to: Message 216 by ICANT
08-25-2016 2:31 AM


Re: Hi 14174Re: Science vs. creation "science"
This is the Hebrew word translated divided in Genesis 10:32. But it does not mean divided. It means separate, or separated.

The Hebrew word פלג means divided or split. Genesis 10:25

As has been pointed out several times, any of these words are perfectly appropriate to describe folks who are dispersed into separate tribes/nations after Babel. You are wasting time when you talk about translations from Hebrew without addressing this point.

And given the way we can see you misread science texts in English, nobody is going to rely on your personal interpretation of Hebrew. Can you point to a reference that adopts and explains your position.

But no one here wants to believe that over 3,000 years ago Moses wrote about water in one place making dry land sticking up through the water.

There might be some quibbles about the timing, but at least some folks accept the part about the water being in one place without accepting that such a description necessarily means a single continent. After all, currently all of the world's oceans are a contiguous body of water, and are in one place in exactly the way described in the Bible.

And of course this explanation has been offered to you. I understand that you reject it, but why lie and say that people don't believe the Bible when they simply don't interpret what they read in the way you do? Such tactics border on being dishonest if they do not, in fact, cross that border.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King

I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend. Thomas Jefferson


This message is a reply to:
 Message 216 by ICANT, posted 08-25-2016 2:31 AM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 219 by ICANT, posted 08-26-2016 12:57 AM NoNukes has replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 220 of 242 (790138)
08-26-2016 10:16 AM
Reply to: Message 219 by ICANT
08-26-2016 12:57 AM


Re: Hi 14174Re: Science vs. creation "science"
This word is used 4 times in the Hebrew text. It is never used concerning people, or nations.

Whoa. It appears that the word was used at least once in such a way. How about showing us the other three. Maybe then you'll have some kind of argument.

The definitions of words are not translations.

Sure, the Hebrew text or the KJV Bible.

And yet you present only the translations of the words to English (divide vs split and separated) as your argument. Perhaps you should make a better argument. As has been pointed out, the KJV text is easily read as applying to the division of people. I'm looking for your best argument that such a meaning is wrong. If you've already made it, then I think your position is not very strong.

All water today is not gathered into one place. Neither is it a contiguous body of water.

I referred to the oceans, ICANT which are a contiguous. The point is that a topography with multiple continents, does not prevent the water from being gathered in one place. Only landlocked water does that.

Again as a rebuttal to the multiple continent argument, it appears that you have no response. To make the argument inescapably clear, if we remove the land locked water from today's geography, the result meets the description in the Bible. Beyond that, even Pangea likely included some land locked water.

Why would there be some quibbles about the timing of when Moses wrote Genesis 10:25?

1) It is not even clear that Moses wrote Genesis.
2) The date at which whoever wrote the text is different from the date at which the events in the text occurred. Quite clearly nobody wrote the text of much of Genesis on the date that the described events occurred.
3) The details of the events described are a subject of our current discussion.

Coming from an educated fellow that just told me that all the water in the world was one contiguous body of water your statement just made my day.

Yes I am educated to one extent or another, and my education tells me that you have just misstated by position; most likely deliberately. I said that currently the oceans were a contiguous body of water. I'll note here that you quoted my statement which was quite specific. The point of my statement is something that has been explained to you many times over the years; namely that gathering the waters into one place does not necessarily result in a single continent. The result could easily be multiple continents without landlocked bodies of water. If you have an argument that such a thing could not occur, then please make it.

We are not all that close to the topic, so feel free to make your best reply. I've made my points and I'm satisfied that the record shows the holes in your own arguments. But my guess is that you really don't have anything except bluster.

Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King

I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend. Thomas Jefferson


This message is a reply to:
 Message 219 by ICANT, posted 08-26-2016 12:57 AM ICANT has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 221 by JonF, posted 08-26-2016 6:24 PM NoNukes has replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 223 of 242 (790317)
08-29-2016 11:17 AM
Reply to: Message 221 by JonF
08-26-2016 6:24 PM


Re: Hi 14174Re: Science vs. creation "science"
Here I emphasise that, fundamentally, it is the lack of new credit being issued that causes economic downturn. If one sector crashes for whatever reason, so long as new credit is being issued, it doesn't matter, growth will continue

There is no reason to make the argument. Asking ICANT to consider the topology of the oceans was an attempt to illustrate the point that gathering the water in one place need not result in only one continent. ICANT's response regarding land locked bodies of water is just his typical evasive tactic.

I'm well used to ICANT's methods by now.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King

I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend. Thomas Jefferson


This message is a reply to:
 Message 221 by JonF, posted 08-26-2016 6:24 PM JonF has not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 224 of 242 (790318)
08-29-2016 11:18 AM
Reply to: Message 221 by JonF
08-26-2016 6:24 PM


Re: Hi 14174Re: Science vs. creation "science"
\\\

Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King

I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend. Thomas Jefferson


This message is a reply to:
 Message 221 by JonF, posted 08-26-2016 6:24 PM JonF has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.1
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2022