Fresh Problem with the Ark

Abbelever wrote:"There is another problem with the ark that I have not seen addressed"The fact of the matter is that there are many, many problems in ths details in how Young Earth creationists explain the story of the Noachian Flood and Noah's Ark. However, the fundamental problem with Young Earth creationists is that they use what the Intelligent Design proponents call "scientific naturalism" to validate the literal truth of this part of Genesis without resorting to miracles. This causes problems beacuse it put thems in damned if they do and damned if they don't.They are damned if they don't because in arguing that it is possible to demonstrate that within the constraints of what is known about biology, chemistry, physics, etc. that the story of Noah's Ark was possibly without invoking any miracles, they are arguing that this part of Genesis is like any other scientific theory. As such, they are damned if they don't because if they can't show, within the contraints known scientific laws and natural processes that either Noah's Ark or the Noachoan Flood is feasible, this part of Genesis is refuted like any of innumerable theories and should be discarded as such.On the other hand, Young earth creationists are equally damned is they are able to show that known physical processes and laws can be used to explain the Noachian Flood and Noah's Ark. If no miracles are required to explain the Noachian Flood or Noah's Ark, then they have removed any need for God to have intervened in any of this. They have removed God completely from this part of Genesis as everything can be explained without there being a God. To argue that Noah's Ark, the Noachian Flood, and Genesis in general can be explained using conventional scientific processes and laws is to argue that neither God nor miracles are needed to explain them.In their rush to be "scientific" and "respectable" it seems like Young earth creationists overlook the primary point of the Noachian Flood and Noah's Ark is that neither can be explained by resorting only to "scientific materialism" / "scientific naturalism". The point of the story of Noachian Flood and the survival of Noah's Ark and its passengers is that they can only be explained by the supernatual, the direct intervention of God. If the Noachian Flood, Noah's Ark, and the rest of Genesis could explained by purely by known scientific laws and processes and processes, they would be as religiously meaningful and spiritual as the either theory of gravity or plate tectonics. For a literal interpretation of Genesis to have any religious significance, it must be only **explainable** in terms of divine intervention. It seems like with lines of arguments like catastrophic plate tectonics to explain Noah's Flood and Woodramppe's book on the feasibility of Noah's Ark, they are attempting a line of arguments that ultimately will divorce God and deny God any role in much of Genesis even if these arguments accepting a literal interpretaton of it.Therefore, it seems to me that if Young Earth creationists want to retain the religious element along with a literal interpretation of Genesis in their explantions, they need to argue not only that events in Genesis, i.e. the Noachian Flood and Noah's Ark, are real, but also, they **can't** be explained using conventional / "naturalistic" / "materialistic" explanations. They have to argue that only direct divine intervention can explain Noah's Flood and the survival of the Ark within in it, which to me is the main point of invoking a literal interpretation of Genesis. It seems to me that Young Earth creationists are contradicting their own beliefs when they argue that Noah's Ark and the Noachian Flood can be explained by purely naturalistist means without invoking either miracles from or divine intervention of God.Just Some Thoughts.Bill[This message has been edited by Bill Birkeland, 03-25-2004]

mf wrote:"But he would be able to pass down that such things existed in the
time before the earth was destroyed. This is why we have all of
these legends and ancient art of airplanes and technology (ie.
Atlantis?????)"Unfortunately, credible examples of the ancient technology, which mf alludes to above, are non-existent. There is simply no hard evidence that the lost civilizations and technology, which mf discusses above, exists outside of the imagiantions of alternative archaeologists, New Agers, certain Young Earth creationists, and UFO proponents.I find it curious that at the bottom of mf's post that he has linked a jpg of the digitally "retouched" picture of some strange hieroglyphics from a lentil at the Temple of Osiris at Abydos as illustrated on the "Pharaoh's Helicopter?" web page at:http://www.catchpenny.org/abydos.htmlThis web page explains the alleged helicopter, the "spacecraft" that lies down and right of the helicopter, and other strange hieroglyphics are the result of the superposition of two sets of hieroglyphics over each other after the first set was filled in with material to produce a smooth surface. Subsequent weathering has removed the filling from the first set creating hieroglyphics that are composite of individual glyphs from each set. The hieroglyphics shown in the figure linked to by mf weren't intentionally carved as now seen but rather an accident of weathering revealing parts of the first sets and superimposing them with the second later set.The two superimposed sets of hieroglyphics is illustrated at:http://www.catchpenny.org/images/abydos3.gifIt is a part of "Pharaoh's Helicopter?" at:http://www.catchpenny.org/abydos.htmlYour,Bill Birkeland

Lindum wrote in Message 28:"That "excerpt" doesn't appear in any version of the Mahabharata
that I can find. Seems to have been pieced together from the
various books by/for UFO conspiracy theorists. Here's a few
lines I've found from another translation."Mf wrote in Message 40:"Maybe that has something to do with the fact that you cannot find
the entire translated Mahabharata on the internet. It's the longest
epic poem in the world. 18 books long. That is very, very long. No
internet site has the whole thing that I can find; especially not
in english. Books 5, 7, 12, and 13 are missing from that site. This
section is in the Drona Parva (from what I am told, but I cannot
find this in its entirety on the internet — too bad)"The reason that this "excerpt" can't be found by Lindum is that it is a complete and utter fabrication. According to Colin Biggs, this "excerpt" was created by "cutting, splicing and recombining of unrelated excerpts; and the making of adjustments and 'improvements' to the translated texts to suite their convenience from various parts of the Mahabharata by:1. Drake, W.R. Spacemen in the Ancient East, Neville Spearmanand2. Leslie, D. & Adamski, G. 1953, Flying Saucers Have
Landed, British Book Centre, Inc.This dishonest "excerpt" was created by these authors to support their claims of extraterrestrials having visited Earth.The orgin of the above "except" is discussed in:1. The Epics of Ancient India -
Their Relevance to Ufology by Colin Biggs
Page Not Found - UFO sightings, meetings : UFO sightings, meetingsand2. The Mahabharata and claims for atomic weapons
Page not foundAnother example of likely fraudulent evidence involving claims of ancient nuclear warfare and weapons is:"ANCIENT CITY FOUND, IRRADIATED FROM ATOMIC BLAST
This file shared with KeelyNet courtesy of Bryant
Stavely. Excerpt from the World Island Review,
January 1992."It appears that this article is a complete fraud, as discussed in "Re: Strange Geneology" at:Page not foundAlso, in "Ancient "Radioactive Skeletons" of India", it is argued that claims about ancient radioactive skeletons having been found in India are the result of obviously sloppy, if not upright deceptive scholarship as discussed at:Page not foundIt seems like the topic of ancient nuclear warfare / weapons contains a lot of alleged evidence that suffers from very careless scholarship to outright fraud. Thus, a person needs to verify just everything that is offered as evdience for ancient nuclear warfare / weapons.Yours,Bill