Flood Evidences — revised

[rational experiences]

Yeah I'll go with scientific facts over your risible and unevidenced rhetoric, but thanks for playing anyway. You are simply wrong here.

If the universe is not billions of years old, how is light visible from stars that are billions of light years away?

Because space is a thin plane that stretches by dense gas. So it's not billions of years away.

 

[rational experiences]

That article states that "the Ark" might have been able to support 35,000 species. Unfortunately for the apologist, there are several million species of animal on earth. Where did the other millions of species come from?

When a human chooses a topic. The subject species is exact to where its always been.

Climatic changes hot cold changes life water and oxygen levels. So if earths body or heavens heats cools two arks.

The UFO sun ark and the earth God stone ark. Two places life's water entered said the teacher to the theist.

Wood burnt by gas burning fallout involving the ark. Water had to board wood also said the teacher.

So life microbiology changed its water celled life and we lost lots of animal forms and human DNA. As the garden nature first wood body tree of life had to take on board new water biology.

If you can't read the bible backwards you were never a teacher of the story.

 

[Audie]

Sorry, but it isn’t….
It doesn’t grow from the top (if it did, you’d have a point.)
It grows from its base. So it’s top features are unaltered.
IOW, 50 million years of extreme weathering, if true, would result in much smoother, rounded characteristics.
And we don’t see it to that degree.

You really think the top of a tall mountain
could weather to a nice smooth rounded shape?

 

[Audie]

Because space is a thin plane that stretches by dense gas. So it's not billions of years away.

Cool, you know more than any astrophysicist.

 

[Sheldon]

The wacky idea that the more the erosion,
the smoother the contours so easily shown to be incorrect, you have to wonder how even a
creationist can believe it.

Yes indeed, leave it to creationists to fail to see the irony of challenging scientific facts with pure rhetoric.

 

[Sheldon]

‘Noah’s Ark would have floated’

Dear oh dear, Did you even read the link?

1. The paper just measured an estimate of the weight of species at that time against the displacement of a ship of the dimensions in the bible, and calculated it would float. Displacement is just the mathematical application of Archimedes principle.

If you'd bothered to read the very brief statement you linked, you'd see it states plainly it doesn't know if that number of species would even fit in a vessel of those dimensions. Let alone how they'd have been gathered by hand from every corner of the globe, or how they would be fed for almost a year, or how their diverse environmental requirements would be catered for on a hand made wooden boat without power, good grief.

It also does not make any assertions about the seaworthiness of any vessel, how could it, with no design to test? As was pointed out in your previous pseudoscience.

There is still no objective evidence for any global flood, and you might ask any credible biologist if the genetic diversity of any species alive today, could be derived from a gene pool of a single breeding pair, indeed several breeding pairs, just to see another piece of idiocy inherent in the myth.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

I haven’t had time to read all these attempts at debunking…. But this comment reveals ignorance of the account:

….Let alone how they'd have been gathered by hand from every corner of the globe,

if you had read the Genesis account, you’d know the animals didn’t have to be “gathered” (what a straw man!); they came to Noah.

As if God was not involved in other aspects of the Event!

According to Genesis…

Who gave the warning, 120 years in advance, that a Flood was coming?

Who gave Noah the instructions, including the Ark’s ideal dimension ratios?

Who brought the waters down from above, and opened the “vast springs” below?

Who closed the door?

Who gave the writer of Genesis the information that the tallest mountain (at that time) was covered by 15 cubits of water?

And after the event, Who opened the door?

To opine God did nothing else, is unreasonable.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

You really think the top of a tall mountain
could weather to a nice smooth rounded shape?

I didn’t say that. But to some degree, yes, the edges would be rounded. Especially with the extreme weathering, after 50 m.y.!

Certainly much more than we observe.

 

[ppp]

I didn’t say that. But to some degree, yes, the edges would be rounded. Especially with the extreme weathering, after 50 m.y.!

Certainly much more than we observe.

Why don't the geologists agree with you?

 

[Audie]

Yes indeed, leave it to creationists to fail to see the irony of challenging scientific facts with pure rhetoric.

Our creationists are entirely sincere but
too easily led astray by people posing
as " experts" putting their proofs on creosites.

Misplaced trust and wanting to believe,
actually, thinking they must believe makes it's on easy to gull people with what looks good
at a glance. Facile!

An example for this erosion trickery
Is posting a photo of an exfoliation dome* as an example of how erosion smoooths contours.

* such mountains or prominences generally
get tagged as. " old baldy".

Of course one could explain and show examples endlessly how erosion routinely
produces knife ridges but the sealed mind
comprehendeth not.

Maybe trying to cross some karst such
as I saw on Haiti** would get the idea across!

** similar to this
Google Image Result for https://c8.alamy.com/comp/BE2WYC/unesco-world-heritage-site-rocks-like-sculptures-karst-topography-BE2WYC.jpg

 

[Hockeycowboy]

Why don't the geologists agree with you?

Some do.
But most would rather say, “We don’t know the answers.”

For mainstream science to accept that the Creator was the Source, or a Source of anything, it would be divorcing itself from its own god, Naturalism.

 

[ppp]

Some do.
But most would rather say, “We don’t know the answers.”

For mainstream science to accept that the Creator was the Source, or a Source of anything, it would be divorcing itself from its own god, Naturalism.

I'm not talking about a creator. I'm talking about the geology.

 

[Audie]

I didn’t say that. But to some degree, yes, the edges would be rounded. Especially with the extreme weathering, after 50 m.y.!

Certainly much more than we observe.

Such vague words about what "we" see or expect is just about your
vague and uninformed opinion..

You simply dont know what you are talking about.
It takes actual work and study. Just making things up
works terrif for religions, but not geology.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

Such vague words about what "we" see or expect is just you.
You simply dont know what you are talking about.

Then please, put me on ignore.

Inane replies without evidence is irritating.

Goodbye.

 

[Audie]

I haven’t had time to read all these attempts at debunking…. But this comment reveals ignorance of the account:


if you had read the Genesis account, you’d know the animals didn’t have to be “gathered” (what a straw man!); they came to Noah.

As if God was not involved in other aspects of the Event!

According to Genesis…

Who gave the warning, 120 years in advance, that a Flood was coming?

Who gave Noah the instructions, including the Ark’s ideal dimension ratios?

Who brought the waters down from above, and opened the “vast springs” below?

Who closed the door?

Who gave the writer of Genesis the information that the tallest mountain (at that time) was covered by 15 cubits of water?

And after the event, Who opened the door?

To opine God did nothing else, is unreasonable.

Who?
Nobody.
Didnt happen.

 

[Sheldon]

if you had read the Genesis account, you’d know the animals didn’t have to be “gathered” (what a straw man!); they came to Noah.

Noah still had to gather them into the ark...

19 You are to bring into the ark two of all living creatures, male and female, to keep them alive with you.

Though it is telling that you think this idea is any less ridiculous?

Freshwater frogs hopping from Australia to the Middle East, hilarious.

 

[Audie]

Then please, put me on ignore.

Inane replies without evidence is irritating.

Goodbye.

Youve provided the evidence that you
know zip about geology.
And you sure have given no evidence about
"Smooth mountains".
What do you need evidenced? If its something
more specific than what "we" expect, i can deliver.
Quite unlike you.

Do you have s prob with an atheist
woman knowing more than you do?

 

[Sheldon]

To opine God did nothing else, is unreasonable.

You have a bizarre grasp of what is unreasonable, but here's a heads up, I don't believe in any deity or deities, and the flood myth in the bible is errant nonsense, that is falsified by any number of objective and scientific facts.

 

[Sheldon]

I didn’t say that. But to some degree, yes, the edges would be rounded. Especially with the extreme weathering, after 50 m.y.!

Certainly much more than we observe.

Evidence please, or is this rhetoric all you have? As if we don't know. Again I'm going to go with science and not your bare rhetoric about weathering.

However if the as you are implying the universe is not billions of years old, how is light visible from starts that are billions of lights years away?

 

[Sheldon]

Why don't the geologists agree with you?

I imagine unless they work for the creation institute they want to remain employable.