Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 48 (9179 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: Jorge Parker
Post Volume: Total: 918,252 Year: 5,509/9,624 Month: 534/323 Week: 31/143 Day: 4/17 Hour: 1/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Noahs Flood
Percy
Member
Posts: 22700
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 3.7


Message 61 of 100 (562507)
05-29-2010 11:06 AM
Reply to: Message 60 by Flyer75
05-29-2010 10:38 AM


Flyer75 writes:
Just one small point I'll make and I'll address your other evidences to this as you post them: If, as Genesis states, God gave Noah 120 years to prepare a monstrous "boat" for this event, did Noah waste is time doing so??? Wouldn't the average man of any sort of intelligence just gathered his belongings and walked away, like to Asia or somewhere, instead of building a boat to float around on during a localized flood????
And why would Noah have needed such a large boat if he only had to save species indigenous to only the local region? He wouldn't have needed to save elephants or dinosaurs or giraffes or kangaroos or squirrels or cattle and all that.
And if the flood was local then since people everywhere else around the globe were spared they must not have been evil. Presumably God was aware of the rest of the world, so why does the Bible describe God as looking down on the world and seeing Noah as the only good man left?
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 60 by Flyer75, posted 05-29-2010 10:38 AM Flyer75 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 63 by Flyer75, posted 05-29-2010 1:06 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22700
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 3.7


(2)
Message 92 of 100 (562739)
06-01-2010 6:26 AM
Reply to: Message 84 by Flyer75
05-31-2010 11:42 PM


Re: Picking and choosing
Hi Flyer,
I know your post has already received three replies, but one point you made deserves more detailed treatment:
Flyer75 writes:
For a second I'll digress; haven't many scientists begin to take a position (s) that yes indeed, catastrophic events did take place, more so then what was originally thought years ago, and that is what can explain many geological structures/strata that we see today.
You're talking about uniformitarianism, and it doesn't mean what you think it does. The concept was introduced by Charles Lyell in the first half of the 19th century, and it means that the same forces and processes at work in the world today were also at work throughout the entire history of the Earth. In addition to slow processes like deposition and erosion, Lyell's famous book, Principles of Geology (Darwin took it with him on the Beagle), included earthquakes, volcanoes and floods. Today we also include processes of which Lyell was unaware, such as glaciers and asteroid and comet impacts.
The term uniformitarianism fell into disuse within geology long ago, probably because it is so easy to misinterpret as excluding the possibility of sudden change. But that's not what it means. Uniformitarianism refers to the array of forces at work, not the rate of change.
So no, scientists are not changing their views about the forces that might have been at work changing our planet in the past. They still think that erosion, deposition, earthquakes, floods, volcanoes, glaciers and impacts are what shapes our planet. And...
Whether one believes a Genesis Noah flood is not the issue in this, just the fact that something big did occur??
Things that actually happened leave evidence behind, and looking back four or five thousand years, there is no evidence of "something big" happening.
--Percy
Edited by Percy, : Grammar.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 84 by Flyer75, posted 05-31-2010 11:42 PM Flyer75 has not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22700
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 3.7


Message 100 of 100 (562854)
06-02-2010 7:35 AM
Reply to: Message 99 by Dr Adequate
06-02-2010 3:35 AM


Re: Picking and choosing
Dr Adequate writes:
Oh, don't spoil it for me. I really wanted him to say what he thought the "problem" was, and now you've scared him off.
Exactly! I want to hear him say what those "might haves" and "could haves" in TV programs on astronomy were actually about. Should we presume they were saying things like this:
  • "The Earth might orbit the Sun in a year."
  • "Venus' orbit might lie inside the Earth's."
  • "The Sun could have a greater mass than Jupiter."
  • "The universe might have begun with the Big Bang."
  • "Andromeda could be around 140,000 light years in diameter."
  • "In the early universe light might have traveled at the speed of light."
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 99 by Dr Adequate, posted 06-02-2010 3:35 AM Dr Adequate 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