Evidences Supporting the Biblical Flood

Jose Fly said:

It's the first step. You don't observe something, declare your conclusion about it to be "obvious", and nothing else.


I'm not talking about using jargon, I'm talking about what I've been trying to get across to you for weeks now....the need to do more than post vague, empty assertions.

Click to expand...

What do you propose?

Do you want me to post about the type of rock that exists on, say, Mt Everest's peak? Alright....it rose from the sea (marine creatures on top); it's mostly limestone. Now, tell me please: is limestone easy to erode? Yes, extremely! It's not like basalt.

So is it worn-down? No, it exhibits well-defined, sharp characteristics! (Not giving a weathered appearance ) This even enhances the hypothesis I support.

Hockeycowboy said:

I know what erosion does....it's obvious, when seen.

Click to expand...

Actually bro, this is what first came to my mind - what wind and rain does to rock over time.
In fact, at home, when we get a heavy downpour, we have a very smooth pathway, where all grit, and small stones varnish. That's not what I noticed in the pictures you showed, but that may only tell a small piece of the story - not the complete picture.

I researched it as promised, and it seems to me, that erosion would indeed drastically transform mountains.
ARAVALI images.

However, imo, I don't think you'll score any points with this one.
Personally I have a problem with using just characteristics and features to reach conclusions. To me, by themselves they can tell misleading stories.

URAVIP2ME said:

I think we could all go on and on. To me the animal kinds were in hibernation for a year.
How about two different aquariums for the fish - just kidding.
Remember it rained for 40 days but the waters did Not subside for a year.
After Noah is resurrected he'll just have to make a video explaining everything for us.
In the meantime, just as Jesus believed in the days of Noah (Matthew 24:37-38) that the people took No note.
I find that is often the case today. Most people don't think there will be divine involvement in mankind's affairs.

Click to expand...

Of course, the "It was a miracle" explanation is always a possibility. But then you have to ask why God wanted an ark built in the first place instead of just miraculously saving them.

nPeace said:

Actually bro, this is what first came to my mind - what wind and rain does to rock over time.
In fact, at home, when we get a heavy downpour, we have a very smooth pathway, where all grit, and small stones varnish. That's not what I noticed in the pictures you showed, but that may only tell a small piece of the story - not the complete picture.

I researched it as promised, and it seems to me, that erosion would indeed drastically transform mountains.

Spoiler: Appalachians

ARAVALI images.

However, imo, I don't think you'll score any points with this one.
Personally I have a problem with using just characteristics and features to reach conclusions. To me, by themselves they can tell misleading stories.

Click to expand...

You are right that erosion does transform mountains. The Appalachians have been transformed over millions of years and are older than the rockys which were formed millions of years ago. They represent two different events separated by millions of years. Formed when continental formations collide not by floods. Weathering is a very slow process. None of this supports a flood as a cause.

Hockeycowboy said:

What do you propose?

Do you want me to post about the type of rock that exists on, say, Mt Everest's peak? Alright....it rose from the sea (marine creatures on top); it's mostly limestone. Now, tell me please: is limestone easy to erode? Yes, extremely! It's not like basalt.

So is it worn-down? No, it exhibits well-defined, sharp characteristics! (Not giving a weathered appearance ) This even enhances the hypothesis I support.

Click to expand...

When you say limestone is easy to erode exactly what time frame are you thinking of? The limestone containing ancient life was lifted upward by the collision of two land masses. Yes Mt. Everest will erode but in the millions of years. None of this supports the flood. Very interesting and complex geology but no support for a flood so why mention it?

Hockeycowboy said:

What should I concede? That these clams died from old age, ie., normally? Or that they died from a cataclysm? The majority of these organisms died suddenly, observed all over the Earth. Was it the Flood? I can't prove it....but what catastrophe do you suggest? The Flood scenario fits the facts.

Click to expand...

Your "died suddenly, all over the earth" is a ststement
considtently only with your chosen flood- be.ief.

It is not considtent with any data, ie, it is just
something made up, a falsehood.

Hockeycowboy said:

After their death, why would their deteriorating adductor muscle not allow them to open? Because they were encased in mud! They couldn't escape!

Does that indicate a normal death to you, or one caused by a catastrophe?

Click to expand...

Ok good, you finally agree that clams buried in
sand / silt, which is where they live, will not mysteriously
open theirs shells on dying.

Live clam dead clam all the same; shells closed.

So, yes, for sure, normal clam fossils indicates a
normal death. A normal clam fossil is typically
a half shell, or an intact, closed shell. Live clam
dead clam all look the same.

Now look at the claim from the op that
closed shell = buried alive in flood.

Hockeycowboy said:

Because observation is the bedrock of science!

I'm not posting on a geology magazine, so no need for geo lingo.

Click to expand...

Yes, observe. And dont just make things up.

Have you sern the American Rockies?

Lots of sharp clear features.

Ever driven across Wyoming and then Nebraska?

The boulders from the talus slopes up above
timberline in Wyoming dont just keep piling up.

They become smaller rocks, rounded pebbles and sand
as streams and rivers take them east.

There is a great sloping plane out to the Missouri
River, thousands of feet thick in the west, that is
made up of outwash from the rovkies.

Do you know that? If not, and you live in the USA,
you have not studied geology.

I might as well talk about the rink and the basket,
saying I studied baseball. Zero credibility.

Like the clamclaim that way.

Hockeycowboy said:

Global Flood evidence:

1.Vast herds, comprising perhaps millions of grazing animals, discovered within the muck fields by gold hunters in the Alaskan and Yukon regions. In the Siberian permafrost, a few have been discovered upright, with food (delicate flowers like buttercups, that only grow in temperate climates) discovered still unchewed in their mouths, like the Berezovka Mammoth. (They died instantly, not from a slow-moving ice age!)

http://www.amendez.com/Noahs Ark Articles/NAS Worldwide Mammal Massacre.pdf

Click to expand...

First I apologize for not reading the whole post. I just read this first point and needed to respond.

If a massive flood caused by raining for 40 days and 40 nights killed those vast herds how were they killed instantly? Drowning is a slow and painful death. Secondly how were they still upright if they were hit by flood waters? Flood waters knock everything down.

So...just how on earth is this an evidence for a global flood?

Drunk_Uncle_Bob said:

First I apologize for not reading the whole post. I just read this first point and needed to respond.

If a massive flood caused by raining for 40 days and 40 nights killed those vast herds how were they killed instantly? Drowning is a slow and painful death. Secondly how were they still upright if they were hit by flood waters? Flood waters knock everything down.

So...just how on earth is this an evidence for a global flood?

Click to expand...

Google it. Spare hockey the time so he wont
again skip his phony clamclaim

IndigoChild5559 said:

Of course, the "It was a miracle" explanation is always a possibility. But then you have to ask why God wanted an ark built in the first place instead of just miraculously saving them.

Click to expand...

Seems to me, since God gifted Earth to mankind, then Earth is man's home sweet home - Psalms 115:16.
It was not yet time for Jesus as Messiah to arrive on the scene, so there would be No such miraculous saving.
That 'miraculously saving' is for the coming 'time of separation' as found at Matthew 25:31-33,37,40.
That is when Jesus with angelic armies will take action to rid the Earth of the wicked.
At that time the executional words from Jesus' mouth will rid the Earth of the wicked as per Isaiah 11:3-4; Revelation 19:14-16.

URAVIP2ME said:

Seems to me, since God gifted Earth to mankind, then Earth is man's home sweet home - Psalms 115:16.
It was not yet time for Jesus as Messiah to arrive on the scene, so there would be No such miraculous saving.
That 'miraculously saving' is for the coming 'time of separation' as found at Matthew 25:31-33,37,40.
That is when Jesus with angelic armies will take action to rid the Earth of the wicked.
At that time the executional words from Jesus' mouth will rid the Earth of the wicked as per Isaiah 11:3-4; Revelation 19:14-16.

Click to expand...

Uh, you are seriously off topic with that prechin'.

Audie said:

Uh, you are seriously off topic with that prechin'.

Click to expand...

How can the Bible topic about the biblical Flood be off topic with the use of Scripture.

URAVIP2ME said:

How can the Bible topic about the biblical Flood be off topic with the use of Scripture.

Click to expand...

Not one word was about evidence for or against "flood".

You might as well have quoted the sermon on the mount.

That is how.

URAVIP2ME said:

I think we could all go on and on. To me the animal kinds were in hibernation for a year.
How about two different aquariums for the fish - just kidding.
Remember it rained for 40 days but the waters did Not subside for a year.
After Noah is resurrected he'll just have to make a video explaining everything for us.
In the meantime, just as Jesus believed in the days of Noah (Matthew 24:37-38) that the people took No note.
I find that is often the case today. Most people don't think there will be divine involvement in mankind's affairs.

Click to expand...

You have a problem with claiming that the animals were in hibernation for a year. Those animals that do hibernate do so for only a few months, and during that time do require nourishment, which they (hopefully) were able to store before hibernating by consuming a massive amount of calories.

Many of the animals that would have been on the Ark would die if they consumed huge amounts of calories prior to boarding the Ark. As an example, an equid that consumed a huge amount of feed at one time would colic and die. Even if that equid were able to consume a huge amount of feed over a longer period of time, while it might not colic, it would most likely founder, which at the very least would render the animal dead lame and at worst would end up with the coffin bones breaking through the sole of the foot, which would render them unable to walk or stand and would result in a slow, painful death.

Then, of course, there is the "small" problem of many of the animals you claim would be "hibernating" being unable to survive for any length of time while lying down, due to the pressure on internal organs (especially if those animals were grossly overweight from consuming massive amounts of food prior to the hibernation, which would be necessary to sustain them for a year) and they would die.

Details, details...any of your supposedly "logical" explanations would require the magical formula of "goddidit."

Audie said:

It is not a good story for those who think about details.

Click to expand...

You are so, so correct. As I mentioned previously, I at one time believed in the Flood story. Then when I moved to a semi-rural area and acquired horses, I discovered from actual experience in dealing with livestock that many issues concerning the Ark and its supposed cargo were impossible to resolve in any logical manner.

Things began to snowball after that, and I began to consider other issues that I had never thought about previously, and the more I considered various details, the less I believed that the Flood could have actually occurred.

URAVIP2ME said:

Seems to me, since God gifted Earth to mankind, then Earth is man's home sweet home - Psalms 115:16.
It was not yet time for Jesus as Messiah to arrive on the scene, so there would be No such miraculous saving.
That 'miraculously saving' is for the coming 'time of separation' as found at Matthew 25:31-33,37,40.
That is when Jesus with angelic armies will take action to rid the Earth of the wicked.
At that time the executional words from Jesus' mouth will rid the Earth of the wicked as per Isaiah 11:3-4; Revelation 19:14-16.

Click to expand...

Let's just reverse this a wee bit, okay? Rather than talking about "miraculously saving" those eight individuals, why don't we consider why God didn't destroy all of the wicked PEOPLE rather than destroying all life (animal, human, and plant) by means of a huge Flood...and then eliminating all of the evidence so that it could never be proven to have occurred?

URAVIP2ME said:

Seems to me, since God gifted Earth to mankind, then Earth is man's home sweet home - Psalms 115:16.
It was not yet time for Jesus as Messiah to arrive on the scene, so there would be No such miraculous saving.
That 'miraculously saving' is for the coming 'time of separation' as found at Matthew 25:31-33,37,40.
That is when Jesus with angelic armies will take action to rid the Earth of the wicked.
At that time the executional words from Jesus' mouth will rid the Earth of the wicked as per Isaiah 11:3-4; Revelation 19:14-16.

Click to expand...

Interesting mythology with no proof. Why even mention it? You can quote every part of the bible you want but it will prove nothing except that you are familiar with the bible. Quoting the bible will not prove the flood occurred so why just quote it? Turtle island (North America) was formed by the help of muskrats and other animals that helped sky woman have land to live on. Wonderful myth that has an important message showing the relationship of man to other life in nature but does that convince you that North America was formed by those animals? There is just as much support for that myth than the myth of the flood and Noah.

IndigoChild5559 said:

Of course, the "It was a miracle" explanation is always a possibility. But then you have to ask why God wanted an ark built in the first place instead of just miraculously saving them.

Click to expand...

That's a fair question. Though I'd like to say before I get into this: by Jehovah God providing those dimensions, it gives evidence of it being a real, Divinely-inspired event....only in the last two centuries, have shipbuilders come to realize that, for that kind of vessel .. non-powered, with no steering and just needing to stay upright and float .. the ratio of those dimensions, i.e., Length being 6 times the Width and 10 times the Height, are ideal, for seakeeping ability.

Source: WWF: Korean Safety Paper

How did Moses (who wrote Genesis) know?
(It was no 'cube', as in the Epic of Gilgamesh.)


Now, to answer your question, "why didn't God 'just miraculously'
save them?"

He did...but I think I know what you mean...the extent of it all, right?
Well, to begin with, we have to establish the ID of those in Genesis 6:1-4...."thie sons of God" taking women: "all whom they chose". (How could they do this? Take any woman, regardless of married or not? Because they were stronger than human men!)

Please read Job 38:7..."(at earth's creation) all the sons of God began shouting in applause." "The sons of God" here must necessarily be the angels (see Job 1:6; Job 2:1), since there were no men as yet in existence.
The same Hebrew words are used at Genesis 6, referring to angels. But these angels, without Jehovah's approval, took on human form and started having sex w/ women, and having kids, "the Nephilim"). (Sounds like Ancient Greek, Roman, Hindu, etc. mythologies, like Zeus fathering Hercules, doesn't it? All mythology is rooted in some form of truth!)

These angels who did this, at the time of the Flood, had to dematerialize and thereafter became demons, whom Peter called
"the angels who sinned" @2 Peter 2:4. Jude says they "forsook their natural dwelling place"... (that's appropriate!) They're also called "the spirits in prison", whom Jesus preached to.

With their power, they could've built colonies / kingdoms in other parts of the Earth.

Anyways....the entire Earth needed to be cleansed of their influence....
The Earth is for 'men to reside' Psalms 115:16), not materialized spirit creatures.

What kind of life would humans have -- being enslaved and sex-trafficked to superhuman creatures -- if God hadn't stepped in?

Would you like to live in a world like Greek mythology depicts?

Drunk_Uncle_Bob said:

First I apologize for not reading the whole post. I just read this first point and needed to respond.

If a massive flood caused by raining for 40 days and 40 nights killed those vast herds how were they killed instantly? Drowning is a slow and painful death. Secondly how were they still upright if they were hit by flood waters? Flood waters knock everything down.

So...just how on earth is this an evidence for a global flood?

Click to expand...

First, i didn't say 'all' were found standing upright...I didn't even say 'many'. I said "a few".

Though it's accepted, don't apologize... just read the rest please.