Flood Evidences — revised

Dan From Smithville · Aug 21, 2019

Hockeycowboy said:
Well, they can’t admit that, can they?
They can’t ignore the evidence (like they’d prefer), since greed has revealed the extent of Mammoth habitation in the far North! (And, no, not all are found in the Permafrost, as I have stated.)

If the site made any other statement, it would be in defiance of reason and evidence.

No one is disputing that mammoths died or that bits and pieces of them were left behind to eventually freeze, but your claims are wild fantasy that bear no resemblance to the facts. Those tusks come from animals that died at different times. If a flood was responsible, there would be mammoth remnants world wide and there would be a mix of all sorts of other animals and plants as if stirred up in a stew pot and dumped everywhere.

Hockeycowboy said:
Since science can’t ignore it now, they have to arrive at some natural explanation (which they conclude they don’t know)...they just can’t allow any supernatural explanation (I.e., the Bible’s account of the Flood) to have any credibility!
That would destroy the modern foundations of science!

You are hilarious. No one has ignored it, it just doesn't support a global flood and even if you could stretch it to fit your preconceived idea, that would not free you from the hundreds of other pieces of evidence that don't do not support the flood.

Hockeycowboy said:
So, they’ll just keep saying, “We don’t know how all the evidence correlates together.” (Which is the ‘accepted’ explanation.) And you’ll keep believing it. What sheep you and the others are.

Lol.

There was no flood. We have nothing that says there was, except an allegory from the Bible, and even older ancient myths that were plagiarized to write the Bible story.

Dan From Smithville · Aug 21, 2019

Hockeycowboy said:
Lol.

How did thousands of these mammoths, not just skeletons but with flesh, get under the permafrost to begin with?

Think about it, if you’re willing.

They died. Just not all at the same time from the same cause. None of them died from a global flood or being flash frozen by hurricane Birdseye.

Dan From Smithville · Aug 21, 2019

Hockeycowboy said:
Uh...the OP presented several.

Sorry. That evidence does not stand. Some of it does not support a global flood at all. You do not understand, but you are under orders to believe no matter what. It is a shame. You seem like you might be an OK person too. But why you would choose a...church, that demands you live lies, is beyond my understanding.

Hockeycowboy · Aug 22, 2019

Audie said:
Explain how all those mammoths buried in
permafrost get to the surface, thaw, rot and get
chewed up, and then get reburied and refrozen?

Many have been found on the edges of riverbanks, as the river eats away at the permafrost. Google “Beresovka mammoth”.

These Mammoths probably didn’t get ‘reburied’, idk. Once they were exposed, the animals ate what they could, then the cold, rainy weather would refreeze the remains.

One source stated that, in Siberian Yakutia where many are found.....
“severe floods wreak havoc almost every spring.”
Russian Land of Permafrost and Mammoths Is Thawing

It stands to reason when winter comes, the weather refreezes what is left.

I’m not saying all discovered mammoth’s cause of death was the Flood, that would be ridiculous....most had lived their lives before the Flood.

Dan From Smithville · Aug 22, 2019

Hockeycowboy said:
You didn't answer my question. How did Mammoths -- some intact -- get underneath the permafrost to begin with

How come we are not finding whales, snakes, apes, aardvarks, sharks, tigers, kangaroos, koalas, wallabies, ostriches, eagles, camels, hippos, bison, and everything else mixed with these mammaths and all dead the same day? Can you splain that?

Dan From Smithville · Aug 22, 2019

Hockeycowboy said:
Many have been found on the edges of riverbanks, as the river eats away at the permafrost. Google “Beresovka mammoth”.

These Mammoths probably didn’t get ‘reburied’, idk. Once they were exposed, the animals ate what they could, then the cold, rainy weather would refreeze the remains.

One source stated that, in Siberian Yakutia where many are found.....
“severe floods wreak havoc almost every spring.”
Russian Land of Permafrost and Mammoths Is Thawing

It stands to reason when winter comes, the weather refreezes what is left.

I’m not saying all discovered mammoth’s cause of death was the Flood, that would be ridiculous....most had lived their lives before the Flood.

You really have nothing. We all knew that, but it appears to be dawning on you too. Don't worry, we won't tell.

Dan From Smithville · Aug 22, 2019

Jose Fly said:
Um....of course he doesn't. @Hockeycowboy has made it abundantly clear that "something that would falsify the Biblical flood" absolutely cannot exist. In both this thread and his last one, anytime a potential problem or bit of contrary evidence was brought up, he did one of two things....he either ignored it or fell back on "God did that part".

And that brings me back, once again, to a question he's dodged every time I've asked it: What's the point of these threads?

If it's to try and make a case that the flood is empirically supported, he apparently doesn't appreciate how invoking "God did that" whenever he encounters a problem runs counter to that purpose.

That was my question too. What is the point of all of this? It isn't like anyone that has actually reviewed this is going to suddenly start ignoring evidence and believe the flood happened. He is not going to stop believing no matter how robust the argument against the flood is. If he is going to invoke magic every time, he encounters something he cannot deal with, what is the point of all this silliness about empirical evidnece?

Dan From Smithville · Aug 22, 2019

Audie said:
Maybe the purpose for a creo is to practice what they
do to crush an inquiring young mind's curiosity.

That would be one way to do it. Lie to them and tell them that Satan controls every scientist on earth in a world wide conspiracy. The same conspiracy that includes government, companies and people not J and W Brand.

Creationists continually seem to be giving Satan greater and greater power.

I know that Satan is a metaphor, but they think he is a real guy sitting around in some boardroom, smoking cigars and sending demons to fetch the mail.

Dan From Smithville · Aug 22, 2019

sooda said:
The last mammoths died out just 3600 years ago...but they ...
https://io9.gizmodo.com/the-last-mammoths-died-out-just-3600-years-ago-but-th-5896262
We usually think of woolly mammoths as purely Ice Age creatures. But while most did indeed die out 10,000 years ago, one tiny population endured on isolated Wrangel Island until 1650 BCE.

Interesting. I did not know this. I am not a mammalogist. Just a simple entomologist.

Hockeycowboy · Aug 22, 2019

Dan From Smithville said:
Sorry. That evidence does not stand. Some of it does not support a global flood at all. You do not understand, but you are under orders to believe no matter what. It is a shame. You seem like you might be an OK person too. But why you would choose a...church, that demands you live lies, is beyond my understanding.

Yes, it does stand. You talk about me (my wife thinks I’m an “OK person”, too...thanks), but your previous response to my question... you didn’t even try to answer! That tells me something:

I feel you’ve been misled, programmed, if you will, to ignore any evidence that might prove the Bibles’ many supernatural accounts!
See, it’s not the religion....it’s the Bible that I have faith in. There’s nothing in the Scriptures to even suggest the Flood is allegorical. In fact, other Bible books beyond Genesis provide further details of the event, like 2 Peter 3; Psalms 104; Matthew 24; etc.

Don’t know who you worship, but I don’t worship a weak God....I worship Jesus’ Father, the Creator of Heaven and Earth.

Hockeycowboy · Aug 22, 2019

Dan From Smithville said:
If a flood was responsible, there would be mammoth remnants world wide and there would be a mix of all sorts of other animals and plants as if stirred up in a stew pot and dumped everywhere.

We’re not discussing a river Flood, as in fast-moving water.
(That is your preconceived idea; the Bible’s account says no such thing.) Most of the waters came from the vast underground springs. IOW, the water from those springs just rose up, engulfing the surface.

And yeah, mammoth remains are found as far North as above the Arctic Circle, to as far south as South Dakota (?) it had a wide range, I guess.

Re: other mammals found in the permafrost of Beringia.....
There are a wide range of other mammals, large and small, that accompany the mammoths. These include the woolly rhinoceros, wolf, fox, lion, brown bear, camel, deer, ground sloth, pika, wolverine, ferret, ground squirrel, moose, reindeer, yak, musk ox, giant beaver, lemming, porcupine, coyote, skunk, mastodon, antelope, sheep, voles, hare and rabbit, plus many species of birds, rodents, horses, and bisons.

Stuart, A.J., Mammalian extinctions in the Late Pleistocene of northern Eurasia and North America, Review of Biology 66:453–562, 1991.

Harington, C.R., Vertebrates of the last interglaciation in Canada: a review with new data, Géographie physique et Quaternaire 44:375–387, 1990

Another source: NOVA | Megabeasts' Sudden Death | End of the Big Beasts | PBS

(Although none of these guys provide satisfactory explanations as to how these mammals got in the permafrost!)

Dan From Smithville · Aug 22, 2019

Hockeycowboy said:
We’re not discussing a river Flood, as in fast-moving water.
(That is your preconceived idea; the Bible’s account says no such thing.) Most of the waters came from the vast underground springs. IOW, the water from those springs just rose up, engulfing the surface.

And yeah, mammoth remains are found as far North as above the Arctic Circle, to as far south as South Dakota (?) it had a wide range, I guess.

Re: other mammals found in the permafrost of Beringia.....
There are a wide range of other mammals, large and small, that accompany the mammoths. These include the woolly rhinoceros, wolf, fox, lion, brown bear, camel, deer, ground sloth, pika, wolverine, ferret, ground squirrel, moose, reindeer, yak, musk ox, giant beaver, lemming, porcupine, coyote, skunk, mastodon, antelope, sheep, voles, hare and rabbit, plus many species of birds, rodents, horses, and bisons.

Stuart, A.J., Mammalian extinctions in the Late Pleistocene of northern Eurasia and North America, Review of Biology 66:453–562, 1991.

Harington, C.R., Vertebrates of the last interglaciation in Canada: a review with new data, Géographie physique et Quaternaire 44:375–387, 1990

(Although none of these guys provide satisfactory explanations as to how these mammals got in the permafrost!)

So, it was a sneaky, gentle flood that crept in ever so soft and gentled nudged its way up over these animals. LOL.

I have been in and around floods, and there would be rushing water everywhere in a global flood. The rising oceans would spill in over the coasts. Water would be rushing down mountains. You don't even have a clue how a global flood would be expected to go about occurring. Incredible! Just incredible! I am astonished that someone that has so little idea about the thing he is arguing for, would even attempt to argue it.

The Bible doesn't say a lot, but that has not stopped you or every other creationist from adding their own bits of speculation to flesh the story out so that it can be more true for you.

No one knows what those fountains of the deep even mean, so there is nothing you can really say about them that even means anything. That is all you adding your speculation to the story and calling it facts.

Yes. The remains are found in the part of the world that mammoths lived in. Not every part of the world, that would be expected if they were tossed about by a global flood.

Your version is that it started raining one minute and look at all this deep water the next minute. Laughably naive and ignorant.

Dan From Smithville · Aug 22, 2019

Hockeycowboy said:
We’re not discussing a river Flood, as in fast-moving water.
(That is your preconceived idea; the Bible’s account says no such thing.) Most of the waters came from the vast underground springs. IOW, the water from those springs just rose up, engulfing the surface.

And yeah, mammoth remains are found as far North as above the Arctic Circle, to as far south as South Dakota (?) it had a wide range, I guess.

Re: other mammals found in the permafrost of Beringia.....
There are a wide range of other mammals, large and small, that accompany the mammoths. These include the woolly rhinoceros, wolf, fox, lion, brown bear, camel, deer, ground sloth, pika, wolverine, ferret, ground squirrel, moose, reindeer, yak, musk ox, giant beaver, lemming, porcupine, coyote, skunk, mastodon, antelope, sheep, voles, hare and rabbit, plus many species of birds, rodents, horses, and bisons.

Stuart, A.J., Mammalian extinctions in the Late Pleistocene of northern Eurasia and North America, Review of Biology 66:453–562, 1991.

Harington, C.R., Vertebrates of the last interglaciation in Canada: a review with new data, Géographie physique et Quaternaire 44:375–387, 1990

Another source: NOVA | Megabeasts' Sudden Death | End of the Big Beasts | PBS

(Although none of these guys provide satisfactory explanations as to how these mammals got in the permafrost!)

They died. The rotted. The permafrost defrosted at the surface as it does normally and seasonally and the remains sank into it. What more technical explanation do you need? Was it magic? You tell me. That is your go to answer for the tough stuff.

Subduction Zone · Aug 22, 2019

Hockeycowboy said:
Yes, it does stand. You talk about me (my wife thinks I’m an “OK person”, too...thanks), but your previous response to my question... you didn’t even try to answer! That tells me something:

I feel you’ve been misled, programmed, if you will, to ignore any evidence that might prove the Bibles’ many supernatural accounts!
See, it’s not the religion....it’s the Bible that I have faith in. There’s nothing in the Scriptures to even suggest the Flood is allegorical. In fact, other Bible books beyond Genesis provide further details of the event, like 2 Peter 3; Psalms 104; Matthew 24; etc.

Don’t know who you worship, but I don’t worship a weak God....I worship Jesus’ Father, the Creator of Heaven and Earth.

Then you stating that the Bible is not the word of God. Are you sure that you want to do that?

Subduction Zone · Aug 22, 2019

One thing about evidence. It can go away. When stronger evidence refutes your claims you lose your supposed evidence (actually you never had any in the first place, but we can get into that later). The various frozen mammoths found are of different dates. That alone refutes the claim that they are from the flood. You can't use the excuse of changing decay rates since that would have only have given all life the same false date. When one makes a bogus excuse to deny reality one should think it through first.

Dan From Smithville · Aug 22, 2019

Hockeycowboy said:
Yes, it does stand. You talk about me (my wife thinks I’m an “OK person”, too...thanks), but your previous response to my question... you didn’t even try to answer! That tells me something:

I am not even sure what question you are talking about. I have no doubt that you will speculate facts into existence, even if they are about me.

Hockeycowboy said:
I feel you’ve been misled, programmed, if you will, to ignore any evidence that might prove the Bibles’ many supernatural accounts!

You can feel that way, but you cannot support it, since the global flood has been falsified.

Hockeycowboy said:
See, it’s not the religion....it’s the Bible that I have faith in. There’s nothing in the Scriptures to even suggest the Flood is allegorical. In fact, other Bible books beyond Genesis provide further details of the event, like 2 Peter 3; Psalms 104; Matthew 24; etc.

So you have deified the Bible and made it the equal of God. How sad. You know there is a rule against having other gods.

The facts clearly indicate that it can only be read as allegory. The stories of Genesis are a combination of different oral traditions and where they are strung together is pretty obvious except for those with blinders on.

Hockeycowboy said:
Don’t know who you worship, but I don’t worship a weak God....I worship Jesus’ Father, the Creator of Heaven and Earth.

You don't know God? Really?

I am not even going to bother to sink to the same level. The pelican loves to do that. I guess it must be what you are taught.

I have said nothing about weakness being God's. It is not. That is not who I am saying is weak at all.

Hockeycowboy · Aug 22, 2019

Dan From Smithville said:
So, it was a sneaky, gentle flood that crept in ever so soft and gentled nudged its way up over these animals. LOL.

I have been in and around floods, and there would be rushing water everywhere in a global flood. The rising oceans would spill in over the coasts. Water would be rushing down mountains. You don't even have a clue how a global flood would be expected to go about occurring. Incredible! Just incredible! I am astonished that someone that has so little idea about the thing he is arguing for, would even attempt to argue it.

The Bible doesn't say a lot, but that has not stopped you or every other creationist from adding their own bits of speculation to flesh the story out so that it can be more true for you.

No one knows what those fountains of the deep even mean, so there is nothing you can really say about them that even means anything. That is all you adding your speculation to the story and calling it facts.

Yes. The remains are found in the part of the world that mammoths lived in. Not every part of the world, that would be expected if they were tossed about by a global flood.

Your version is that it started raining one minute and look at all this deep water the next minute. Laughably naive and ignorant.

Lol.
How little you’ve examined the evidences I posted.
What’s amazing, is how you don’t want to reason on it. We’re talking a global flood, with water rising, everywhere, not falling (except the water which rained). It didn’t have anywhere to “rush” to, lol. This is one scenario, but it does fit the evidence as currently understood. Probably the “Floodgates of the Heavens” (as per the Bible’s description) opened first, causing extreme changes to the Northern climate, then the “springs of the vast watery deep” ‘broke open’ next.

The waters covered the Earth for over a year, the Southern and Northern latitudes — especially the Northern, at the Flood’s beginning — covered in ice and snow. (Yes, that’s my deduction.)

Finally, when the waters receded (into the ocean basins, as they sank), that’s when the rushing would begin.

Your nasty and scoffing attitude, I don’t need. (Such closed-mindedness!) No more explaining things to you, I’m through.

Dan From Smithville · Aug 22, 2019

Subduction Zone said:
One thing about evidence. It can go away. When stronger evidence refutes your claims you lose your supposed evidence (actually you never had any in the first place, but we can get into that later). The various frozen mammoths found are of different dates. That alone refutes the claim that they are from the flood. You can't use the excuse of changing decay rates since that would have only have given all life the same false date. When one makes a bogus excuse to deny reality one should think it through first.

The impression I get from strict literalist creationists is that they think a global flood would consist of water slowly and gentling rising up at the same level and rate like a bathtub being filled. They haven't thought any of it through.

The entire idea that some length, width and height ratios of a boat would be evidence for a flood is ridiculous. At best, all they tell us is that a description matches the ratios of a small, modern cargo craft. He does not even understand what he has included on his list or what it means.

Subduction Zone · Aug 22, 2019

Hockeycowboy said:
What’s amazing, is how you don’t want to reason on it. We’re talking world-wide, with water rising everywhere, not falling (except that water which rained). It didn’t have anywhere to “rush” to, lol.

The waters covered the Earth for over a year, the Southern and Northern — especially the Northern — latitudes covered in ice and snow. (Yes, that’s my deduction.)

Finally, when the waters receded (into the ocean basins as they sank), that’s when the rushing would begin.

Your nasty and scoffing attitude, I don’t need. (Such closed-mindedness!) No more explaining things to you, I’m through.

And you forgot that ice floats in this world. The icecaps, both Antarctica and Greenland, are both hundreds of thousands of years old.

Subduction Zone · Aug 22, 2019

Dan From Smithville said:
The impression I get from strict literalist creationists is that they think a global flood would consist of water slowly and gentling rising up at the same level and rate like a bathtub being filled. They haven't thought any of it through.

The entire idea that some length, width and height ratios of a boat would be evidence for a flood is ridiculous. At best, all they tell us is that a description matches the ratios of a small, modern cargo craft. He does not even understand what he has included on his list or what it means.

I know. slow rising water would not cover the Earth. Slow draining water would take far more than a year to go away if the magic flood was to leave no physical evidence at all.

Flood Evidences — revised

Recently discovered my planet of origin.

Recently discovered my planet of origin.

Recently discovered my planet of origin.

Witness for Jehovah

Recently discovered my planet of origin.

Recently discovered my planet of origin.

Recently discovered my planet of origin.

Recently discovered my planet of origin.

Recently discovered my planet of origin.

Witness for Jehovah

Witness for Jehovah

Recently discovered my planet of origin.

Recently discovered my planet of origin.

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Recently discovered my planet of origin.

Witness for Jehovah

Recently discovered my planet of origin.

Veteran Member

Veteran Member