It would have to be something of a huge magnitude they couldn't escape except by being on a boat, which wouldn't be needed if it was just a local flood.
Reminds me of something Velikovsky wrote. Some fish fossils had died with horrified expressions on their faces indicated that they must have died in some immense catastrophe. But I would think that their own deaths (and maybe the deaths of their loved-fish) would have been horrifying enough.
All that are in Hell, choose it. -- CS Lewis That's just egregiously stupid. -- ringo
Thank you. I should have reported it long ago but I had this weird idea that it was just something about what brackets do that was causing the problem and I had the responsibility to remember to avoid it. Being tech-challenged plays havoc with computer life.
Theyâ€™re not going to just disappear. Some of them are going to get buried somehow.
quote: Excuse me if I get a little gruesome here, but I've been reading and watching a lot of stuff about ****** cases in which bodies are often disposed of in mountains and forests, and even if the victims are buried it's never deep enough to keep animals from digging them up and destroying them. If they are just on the surface they are destroyed by insects and microorganisms as well as animals. If they are found at all they are often found strewn all over the landscape and it doesn't take much time before there is nothing but bare bones, certainly not fossilized or in any condition to ever be fossilzed.
That is a weird objection. A typical vertebrate fossil is disarticulated â€œbare bonesâ€. Often just a few. Complete or near complete skeletons are much rarer. Arguing that fossils should be the way that they really are doesnâ€™t really work for you.
quote: Burial is not a natural thing that happens to dead things. You need special circumstances, and even if buried they aren't going to get fossilized without being saturated in mineral bearing water and compression helps too. These are all conditions provided by the Flood and very rare otherwise. The remarkably uniform conditions in which we find the fossils and their stratified gravebeds is really impossible to explain on the basis of time periods of millions of years.
I have no idea what makes you think that conditions are â€œremarkably uniformâ€. Buried by sandstorms or landslides or volcanic eruptions, or being swept along by a river buried where it is building up sediment or being covered in sediment at the bottom of an anoxic lake all seem fairly different to me.
quote: Nothing gets buried in rock. What are you talking about?
Your idea that it is absurd that we would see distinct things from different time periods in the fossil record. Obviously there is nothing absurd about finding creatures living at the time the material was deposited as fossils. Nor is there anything absurd about life changing over time.
quote: Yeah but as I said just getting buried at all is far from something to be expected.
It is not to be expected to happen to any particular individual. But that is a long way from expecting it not to happen at all. In fact we should expect it to happen to some, itâ€™s statistically inevitable.
quote: Oh for sure, but isn't it odd then that they occurred so regularly and consistently in such uniform conditions that stacked one on top of another with such neat contact lines in so many cases and such very specific sorted out corpses, all stacked one on top of another miles deep
Itâ€™s not that regular, the conditions are hardly uniform, the contact lines have nothing to do with fossilisation, the â€œspecific sorted out corpsesâ€ are a problem for your view as is the â€œstackingâ€.
The people who came along and overturned that established wisdom were the natural philosophers, geologists, paleontologists, chemists, physicists, etc etc etc, who showed that the Flood could not have been anything but a local event, if it even was a particular event and not merely a memory of various floods over the ages.
However, there was a global world-wide flood that we are still in the middle of. And which is now getting much worse.
Question: "Is there any evidence of a single world-wide flood?" Answer: "YES, and it is still going on!"
During the ice ages, the sea level would subside due to the amount of water that would be trapped in the ice caps rather than being in the oceans. During the last great ice age, the Wisconsinan, the sea level was about 200 feet lower than it is now. This means that ocean bottom shallower than 200 feet was dry land and a number of land bridges, such as the one across the Bering Strait were open. Judging from my atlas, most of the Persian Gulf should have been dry land. Then about 11,000 to 17,000 years ago, the Wisconsinan Ice Age ended, the ice melted, and the sea level rose, flooding the lowlands. Since human populations tend to concentrate along the shorelines and in the lowlands, this catastrophic flooding could not have gone unnoticed. Indeed, it would be very surprising NOT to encounter flood stories world-wide. So not only do we have here an example of a single world-wide flood produced entirely by natural causes, but it is still going on; the flood waters have not subsided! Indeed, if the world climate warms up as we fear it will, then we would be faced with still worse flooding as the sea level rises another 150 feet (if the entire Antarctic ice cap were to melt).
Of course, the actual world-wide flood is nothing at all like in creationists' wet dreams.
ABE: There is also archaeological evidence of submerged man-made structures. Several dwellings have been found in the Black Sea which would help support the Black Sea Hypothesis (ie, a natural dam burst). There have also been documentaries of sunken cities or temples off the coast, such as one off of India. Both of those would be due to rising sea levels.
Edited by dwise1, : ABE
Edited by dwise1, : use the adjective, not the adverb!
Zeus, Thor, Indra, etc. Why should different cultures all have a thunderbolt-throwing god?
Two things: There IS a "thunderbolt throwing god" though he got deposed by Jesus Christ.
And cultures passed their religions and their stories on to each other. The Two Babylons is a book that traces the pagan religion of Semiramus and Tammuz through cultures all over the world, ending up in the pagan superstitions of the Roman Church. And of course the Flood story would have been handed down the same way. They all came originally from the family on the ark, and that story was handed down, same as the stories of the pagan gods and religions they developed, that distorted the story of the true God but nevertheless got preserved in that distorted fashion. Pagan religion distorted the memory of the true God due to the influence of demons, and the same happened with the memory of the Flood.
Big floods are life-changing events, from Johnstown to the great Mississippi flood of 1927 to Katrina. They go back far into history: the Nile floods, the monsoons in south Asia, the tsunamis of the Pacific ring of fire, the Lake Geneva flood of the year 563, the Yellow River is known as "China's Sorrow" for the catastrophic floods that killed millions and scoured the countryside, changing the very landscape. Water is life and ****** live near water.
Those all clearly present local floods. The universal flood stories are smething different. Gilgamesh is the one that most clearly refers to a worldwide flood, but there are plenty of others that are clearly NOT about local floods but give a distorted picture of the flood of Noah in the understanding of many scholars.
The floods of the Yellow River or the Nile floods or any other catastrophic event would have come down in history as affecting "everyone" and "everything" because they affected all the world known to those people.
The bible doesn't refer to China, so why should a flood referred to in the bible be thought of as affecting China?
They didn't affect ppeople to the extent of their only being saved on a boat. They are clearly local no matter how catastrophic.
Why do you believe all that and deny the Biblical account? That one just doesn't count of course, only the reimaginings of atheists matter, only the corrupted pagan world matters, only the debunkery matters, the denigration of the biblical account is the point, the one story that accounts for all the rest of them.
The Bible needs to refer to China to describe a worldwide Flood? Why is that?
The bible literalists would say that a flood referred to as covering all the world meant a flood covering the entire surface of the planet simultaneously, rather than just the part of the world the storytellers knew. But the bible is clearly not to be taken literally (There obviously were rainbows before the time of Noah, for example).
Chemical lithification doesn't need thousands of years
Really? Show us a citation.
And if you squash pores what happens to the water in them?
Water is essentially incompressible, so any gas would be compressed to essentially zero volume until there was only water that doesn't change volume. Except for any edges exposed to the atmosphere (very rare) the pressure would be almost perfectly hydrostatic (acting equally in all directions -- see Newton's second law). The hydrostatic component of stress does not move the water. The non-hydrostatic component does move the water, very slowly, through pores so small that the frictio of the water against the solid wall is significant, resisting the motion. It moves somewhere between a few yards per day and and an inch per century, depending on lots of factors... although lithifying rocks tend toward the slower end because of the very small pore sizes.