Evidences Supporting the Biblical Flood

[Bob the Unbeliever]

Where?
.

He gave you a whole list in his link.....

 

[Hockeycowboy]

LMAO! No, dude! I'm not that creative.

But the bible authors WERE: The bible literally describes a flat-disc of the earth, which rests on 4 pillars. And the sky is a crystal dome with holes-in, to permit "the waters above" to come through as rain.

It is in there-- I've read the passages.

But the FACT YOU DO NOT KNOW? Proves to 100% that you have NEVER read the entire bible!

LOL! Too FUNNY!

I've read it 4 times...it doesn't.
A "flat Earth"?!
A "crystal dome"?!
Nope...sorry.


"It is in there-- I've read the passages. "

Then it should be no problem to post them!

Because one of us is lying.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I think the Flood caused the Ice Age.

So you think there was an ice age within written human history?

I think the Flood caused the Ice Age. Grief, I’ve read articles from researches saying we still have an ice age! (Which is quickly disappearing.) There are glaciers all over the Northern and Southern Hemispheres...198,000. If you count smaller ones, up to 400,000.

But I'm talking about the last glacial maximum. Do you understand the point I'm making? Set aside whether you agree with it; do you at least understand it?

 

[Hockeycowboy]

So you think there was an ice age within written human history?


But I'm talking about the last glacial maximum. Do you understand the point I'm making? Set aside whether you agree with it; do you at least understand it?

I think so. What do you think I don't understand about it?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I think so. What do you think I don't understand about it?

I was talking about a time when glaciers covered more of the Earth than now and you went off on a tangent about how we’re still in an ice age. This suggested to me that you weren’t getting my point.

 

[RedhorseWoman]

I guess I didn't explain it clearly enough...not on you, it was something I was wondering about.

It was apparently the land itself, when losing their underground support and falling, which forced the waters upward.


It didn't....it formed larger oceans and thicker ice caps. So it's here, above the Earth's crust.

Are you really, truly stating that all of the water that was supposedly covering the earth during the Biblical Flood is now encapsulated in the North and South poles and in more ocean than was present before?

Do you honestly believe that if all of the water currently being held in glaciers and the polar caps was to melt, the entire earth would be covered with water to a depth higher than the highest mountains? You believe that? Sorry, but although the level of the oceans would rise and cover many coastal areas and low-lying islands, there would not be sufficient water to re-create the depths of water required for the Flood.

 

[blü 2]

Where?
Let's just take this. Do you know the Hebrew word "raqi'a"?

"Some translations use the word “firmament”......From this the argument is made that the Genesis account borrowed from creation myths that represent this “firmament” as a metal dome. But even the King James Version Bible, which uses “firmament,” says in the margin, “expansion.” This is because the Hebrew word ra·qiʹa‛, translated “expanse,” means to stretch out or spread out or expand."
Source:Firmament — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

The quotes below are from that link you didn't read. They show the sky as a fixed dome.

5. The firmament (sky) is a fixed dome
Job 22
12 “Is not God high in the heavens? See the highest stars, how lofty they are! 13 Therefore you say, ‘What does God know? Can he judge through the deep darkness? 14 Thick clouds enwrap him, so that he does not see, and he walks on the vault of heaven.’

7. The firmament (sky) is a fixed dome.
Job 37
18 Can you, like him, spread out the skies, hard as a molten mirror?

17. The firmament (sky) is a fixed dome.
Isaiah 14
13 You said in your heart, ‘I will ascend to heaven; above the stars of God I will set my throne on high; I will sit on the mount of assembly in the far north; 14 I will ascend above the heights of the clouds, I will make myself like the Most High.’

22. The firmament (sky) is a fixed dome.
Ezekiel 1
22 Over the heads of the living creatures there was the likeness of a firmament, shining like crystal, spread out above their heads. 23 And under the firmament their wings were stretched out straight, one toward another; and each creature had two wings covering its body. 24 And when they went, I heard the sound of their wings like the sound of many waters, like the thunder of the Almighty, a sound of tumult like the sound of a host; when they stood still, they let down their wings. 25 And there came a voice from above the firmament over their heads; when they stood still, they let down their wings. 26 And above the firmament over their heads there was the likeness of a throne, in appearance like sapphire; and seated above the likeness of a throne was a likeness as it were of a human form.

23. The firmament (sky) is a fixed dome.
Ezekiel 10
1 Then I looked, and behold, on the firmament that was over the heads of the cherubim there appeared above them something like a sapphire, in form resembling a throne.

25. The firmament (sky) is a fixed dome.
Amos 9:
6 who builds his upper chambers in the heavens and founds his vault upon the earth,

27. The firmament (sky) is a fixed dome. The stars are affixed to the firmament. If they come loose they will fall to earth.
Matthew 24
29 “Immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light, and the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken;

29. The firmament (sky) is a fixed dome. The stars are affixed to it. If they come loose they will fall to earth. The earth is flat.
Revelation 6
13 and the stars of the sky fell to the earth as the fig tree sheds its winter fruit when shaken by a gale; 14 the sky vanished like a scroll that is rolled up, and every mountain and island was removed from its place. 15 Then the kings of the earth and the great men and the generals and the rich and the strong, and every one, slave and free, hid in the caves and among the rocks of the mountains, 16 calling to the mountains and rocks, “Fall on us and hide us from the face of him who is seated on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb;

 

[Audie]

What would happen, do you think, if a respected scientist published his interpretation of the evidence in a way that supported a supernatural event described in the Bible, no matter how well it explained the facts? There would be such an uproar! He’d be martyred and lose status and funding!

Worse than what happened to Richard Sternberg.

But I’ll look for one. Maybe someone retired, then wrote it. (Doubt it’d be peer-reviewed, though.)

Ok you already have two excuses in place, for your inevitable failure,
and an escape hatch.

All scientific paprrs show arctic / subarctic vegetation.
Resort to such as your flying saucer guy will do as an admission
of your failure to show otherwise.

 

[Audie]

Correct. Because he'd not be doing SCIENCE AT ALL-- which DEMANDS that we follow where the evidence leads.

What you describe? Would be LYING about his "experiment" in order to preserve DOGMA.

That's religion -- no science. And yes-- he'd correctly be drummed out of science.

Just like what happened to Michael Behe... point of fact..... for doing exactly that: Lying.

Oh, I dunno. Are you sure about that?

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

I've read it 4 times...it doesn't.
A "flat Earth"?!
A "crystal dome"?!
Nope...sorry.


"It is in there-- I've read the passages. "

Then it should be no problem to post them!

Because one of us is lying.

That would be you who is lying. I posted a LINK in my very next post.

I noticed you ignored it 100%. So the one lying is YOU.

It's what all creationists must do, so it's not out of character.

 

[Audie]

That would be you who is lying. I posted a LINK in my very next post.

I noticed you ignored it 100%. So the one lying is YOU.

It's what all creationists must do, so it's not out of character.

The whole op was a gish of falsehoods.

I pivked out one little detail, not even one that
would negate his "flood", something as
non-threatening as I could get. Just a scientific
paper listing species of plants found with the
mammoths.

Going by first response, which fell into the
"Foul-hooked alligator" *category, I'd guess that
even that tiny concession to actual data is
too much.

*thrash about, trying to bite, anything, as in the attack on
all them scientists who would hypothetically reject
out of hand any work that included the suoernatural.

This aint a q on the supernatural. It is, "what species of plants
did the botanists back at the lab identify?".

So far, no go but maybe he will prove an honest man.
To do otherwise is said to be going against god.

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

Oh, I dunno. Are you sure about that?

Yeah... but it may take some time for them to be drummed out of science...

As for Behe? He is no longer considered an actual scientist. He sold his 'soul' to making money selling BS to creationists.

And those poor delusional fools buy his "books" by the dozens.

If I did not have a conscience? I'd so write a creationism book, and also make a mint off of these fools.

Alas, that would turn my stomach, to steal so much money from people who typically cannot afford a decent lunch.

 

[Jose Fly]

So @Hockeycowboy I take it that you and I are done? You're not going to discuss and address the specific geologic conditions around uplift mountain ranges and describe how the data is better explained by your scenario than by the plate tectonics model?

 

[Bear Wild]

No...the Flood aftermath would, and did, match his observations of frozen, shredded body parts. Because, in the Northern Lattitudes, the water which came from below and fell from above instantly froze....the atmospheric waters had surrounded the Earth, resulting in a Greenhouse Effect....but they weren't there, anymore. This resulted in sudden, drastic climate changes.

This does fit the facts of what is observed. And these animals are observed to have died together...there aren't 'layers' of graveyards, but just one, from each location.

That doesn't make any sense. If the water would freeze instantly then it would be as high as the flood but if the water washed away then the animals would be washed out with the water unless you are saying that god intentionally let the water go down without going anywhere then froze the animal there so that could be discovered at that instant to prove the flood which still does not prove the flood. Thus the entangled explanation has to keep searching for any think. Why not just include a stone tablet from god saying this was because of the flood? The extinction period was over a long period of time not just one event. Why even try to explain it when your explanation is just as unbelievable as the great flood itself. The other evidence is just as silly. Even if the arc could have held the weight of two of every animal there would be not enough space on the arc. No matter how you try to find whatever evidence you think will prove the story it just as magical as the story itself. It is a myth. Was it fresh water or salt since changes in salinity and kill whichever was not adapted to the salt water flood or fresh water flood. You also forgot to take into account the plants which would also have been destroyed. Accept it as a myth just as genesis is a myth and still enjoy your faith.

 

[Subduction Zone]

So @Hockeycowboy I take it that you and I are done? You're not going to discuss and address the specific geologic conditions around uplift mountain ranges and describe how the data is better explained by your scenario than by the plate tectonics model?

Sadly when literalists know that they have lost they will run away and then after what they deem to be a long enough period of time they will present the same old failed arguments again and again. Which is why we have the acronym PRATT's.

EDIT: Or put you on ignore. That appears to be what @Hockeycowboy did with me. When his obvious ignorance of science is commented on he falsely calls that an "ad hominem" indicating that he does not understand what an ad hominem fallacy is. Then if you commit the "ultimate sin" as I did of offering to help him understand the basics of science so that he can debate more effectively he puts that person on ignore. That is some serious Ostrich Defense.

 

[Bear Wild]

Please make the bacteria evolve into a dog and I'll be happy to change my mind about evolution

The evolution from single cell organisms to dogs, cats and humans has already occurred why do we have to prove it again. Anyway how much time to you have left in your life to watch such a change? Asking for ridiculous proofs is the same thinking as in believing the great flood with Noah was true and not myth as well as genesis is the way our world happened instead of a myth. Neither has proof of any kind yet the theory of evolution has extensive proof. Which is more believable that without any proof or the one with extensive proof. It would be better just to say I don't care about proof and say I will believe in whatever magical thing I am told and not bother to look into our world and begin to see how amazing it really is.

 

[Shad]

I appreciate the link.

However, I don’t see where he concludes that a conscious state of activity has no relationship with algorithmic patterns, ties in with metaphysics exactly.

Did I miss something?

Read the book. Penrose discusses his view physics, and some of his own ideas, in relation to major philosophical questions and possible answers, from his point of view.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

Read the book. Penrose discusses his view physics, and some of his own ideas, in relation to major philosophical questions and possible answers, from his point of view.

OK, I'll try to get to it.
I just downloaded a PDF. It's 247 pigs, grief.

 

[Shad]

Please make the bacteria evolve into a dog and I'll be happy to change my mind about evolution

Enroll in grade 10 biology as your question is flawed

 

[nPeace]

The evolution from single cell organisms to dogs, cats and humans has already occurred why do we have to prove it again. Anyway how much time to you have left in your life to watch such a change? Asking for ridiculous proofs is the same thinking as in believing the great flood with Noah was true and not myth as well as genesis is the way our world happened instead of a myth. Neither has proof of any kind yet the theory of evolution has extensive proof. Which is more believable that without any proof or the one with extensive proof. It would be better just to say I don't care about proof and say I will believe in whatever magical thing I am told and not bother to look into our world and begin to see how amazing it really is.

Why shouldn't it be a piece of cake to recreate it in a lab, since all the genes for making different features are there?
They talk a lot about their experiments with bacteria and seeing evolution in hours.
It shouldn't be hard to create the RNA, and then build on it - demonstrating it... or is it?
Perhaps you just want us to have blind faith.

By the way, there is no proof for evolution. Perhaps you might want to use another expression.