The Flood

Re: The flood


Oh stop it. The bible doesn't 'figure' anything. It doesn't figure cubs or yearlings or size, and it doesn't figure on hibernation. Get a grip, it's all just total ridiculous baloney.

Come on, the water came up, the water came down, the water swirled all around, and the big boat came to rest on a high mountaintop. And all the nice animals marched off and repopulated the world after the water drained away like in a toilet. Sure, and the earth is flat and the moon is made out of cheese.

If you're living in the real world, then the flood story is just fantasy, and evolution is an absolute fact.

If you're living in Gungaland, or some other ridiculous parody of reality, then the flood happened just like the bible says and evolution didn't happen, even though every shred of real evidence on the planet says it did.

Which world do you live in?

And weren't there more than four married couples in Noah's family? Good heavens - he WAS 600 yrs old, after all. And none of the grandchildren?

It is patently obvious that this is all fabrication. The bible is NOT to be taken literally. It's one big, long parable. The Old Testatment, anyway.

If the whole world flooded, where did the water drain to? Did it slip off the edge when we were revolving and rotating? Or did it evaporate? LOL

I didn't drain anywhere. The flood permanently increased the volume of water on the Earth.Humans have always lived near water since we originally lived IN water, and most of the areas which humans inhabited prior to the flood are now beneath the waves. Whether or not he waters of the flood covered the areas we live in NOW is problematical, and not necessary for the story of the global flood to be truth. Again, they are now finding cities far enough beneath the waves to preclude any sort of a uniformitarian explanation; do your own google searches on 'zelitsky', 'Cuba', and 'city'.

Oh, so it's still here? So you consider the conditions we have now to be a 'global flood'?

I get it, eveyone lived on the floor of the ocean before, but there was no water in the oceans, so when the water magically appeared to fill the oceans everyone chose to drown rather than migrate up onto the beach on Cape Cod.

And when the ark came to rest, it actually came to rest on Aruba, but they called it a mountain because before, when they lived on the ocean floor Aruba looked like it was waaaaaay up there.

Real Life. Think of the ocean flats and the conshels as big Persian Rugs lying atop movable plates. India's persian Rug was slammed against The uderside of Asia about 25 my ago bounded by the Baluchistan faults and the Indo Burmese range. We have excellent radiometric data and also, the fossils of the Himalayan Rocks match the ocean basin of the area around MAdagascar, not Asia,.

The geology is conclusive, in light of continental drift.

Also, there are entire HUUUGE areas of the planet where no water has flooded for many hundreds of millions of years and in the case of many of the Continental Shield areas, these areas hadnt been overlain by any water deposits for a billion years or more.

There is absolutely no evidence that there is one single period in time that a single epigenic sea covered the planet. When one basin appeared or an "epicontinental sea" , there were other entire areas that were dry as a bone. Think about the rafting continents just since Pangea broke up (and this happened at least 2 times earlier), we have entire terrains that match each other in time and , by the fact that they show no evidence of contemporary matching sea deposits or "deluge , riverine, palludal, or lacustrine deposits) they by being "erosion" surfaces, indicate that they were above what we call geologic base level.

The science is quite mature and able to predict where deposits of various minerals and energy deposits would occur. Look at the geologists who persisted in searching for diamonds in the Nation of Nuniavut just because of the similarity and genetic connection this area had within the Caledonian Highlands deposits. They found G10 Pyrope garnets in the CAledonian-Appalachian-San luis Craton and So African Congo/Crasal rift zones. All along this rift zone (except in the very middle of the Appalacians, are Kimberlite pipes with the special G10 garnets (indicates possibe diamond bearing) Everybody thought that this was a gamble (even other geologists who understood the similarities and the structure.
Would a "Floodist" have a single clue about the age relationships and the structural similarities of these areas and the possiblity of a major diamond find? (Im gonna say no because it would be tantamount to them admitting that "rafting of cratons is a major evolution engine for diversity of species)

All I can say is, If anybody would invest some real money to find ores, oil, gas or coal based on what we jokingly call "Flood Geology" They would certainly lose huge fortunes.

If you can name one successful geologist (or investor) who has made money using flood geology , Id really like to know their name.

BEtcha I dont get one response to this challenge

I guess all the water must have evaporated! But...if that happened it would simply rain back down flooding the Earth again. Anyone who believes that story of Noah and the animals on the ark out to have his/her head examined.

When people believe in something as a matter of their faith, I wouldnt say that they are in need of help. I would say that their faiths require a degree of impossible belief that they must forego, or be selective in which laws of the Universe they are allowed to believe.

Since this is a debate and no ones keeping score, its no sense being unkind to the people of faith. Think about politics and political debate herein (with the notable exception that with science we have clear evidence). Im certain that we will never convince the Flood believers that their belief is incorrect, no matter what evidence we parade out. All we can do is make them think harder so they can talk themselves into the fact that they are standing on very thin ice.

Some of them cobble together some fairly good arguments and others just get flippant and dig into their dens even deeper.

I don't mind people having faith. I really don't. But if they're gonna believe in magic, they should just say they believe it's all magic and leave it at that.

All these discussions of what is possible and impossible, likely and unlikely are meaningless if they accept magic at any level.

Let's face it, an all powerful god could have created the whole world yesterday, and we would have no way of knowing it if he didn't want us to know. Once you allow all powerful magic into your world view there's no sense trying to understand anything, you've already taken the default position of not being able to recognize reality when you see it.

Where are these cities 2000 feet below the sea? Did I miss something on the news?

Apparently.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/1697038.stm
http://www.s8int.com/water27.html
http://s8int.com/water19.html
http://www.andrewcollins.com/page/articles/lostcity.htm
http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/41/236.html
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/656648/posts
http://themegablog.spaces.live.com/
http://www.vnn.org/americas/AM0112/AM08-7025.html
http://www.globalheritagefund.org/news/conservation_news/underwater.asp
http://www.stevequayle.com/Giants/Ancient.Civ_Technol/020327.Canadas.lost.city.html
http://www.sciforums.com/archive/index.php/t-6663.html
http://www.megalithic.co.uk/article.php?sid=2146410578

etc. etc. etc.

As in, ruins 2000 feet beneath the waves. As in, global catastrophe.

A Global Catastrophe OR an earthquake like most of those articles suggest.

As in, 'unidentified' geological formation.

As in, possible result of earthquake.

As in, not even remotely evidence of a global flood, even if it happens to turn out to be an ancient structure and not just some interesting stones.

As in, not even a good try.

Why the rage to deny something which you clearly do not know jack **** about?

Ros, I was not deep in the debate of whether the religious point was valid for me and (probably you too). I was trying to stifle a growing sense of 'stationed superiority" by (hopefully) shitcanning the rising tide of epithets towards each other and stifling the " questioning the sanity" of those who dont accept evolution.

I find that its an easy place to mount and what happens next is that we lose the mutual respect that our debates usually have had. When gunga responds in his ad-hominems at "evo-losers" I know that its all hes got in his quiver, and that mere patience and scientific facts can win the discussions about the issue he deploys.

I used to be quite impatient regarding this and , over the last few years have developed more of a "quiet smile" while still (hopefully) retaining a sense of mutual interest that the subject demands.
Otherwise , itll quickly degrade into the name calling that closed down the "Evolution-How?" thread.
So my point is that we all just quit the feigned incredulity about the other sides. (Both sides need to do this). By so doing, we distill the topic down to its essential opils and do away with the spectre of name calling that aklways destroys a thread.

I dont know, maybe its just impossible to do.

Ros, I was not deep in the debate of whether the religious point was valid for me and (probably you too). I was trying to stifle a growing sense of 'stationed superiority" by (hopefully) shitcanning the rising tide of epithets towards each other and stifling the " questioning the sanity" of those who dont accept evolution.

I find that its an easy place to mount and what happens next is that we lose the mutual respect that our debates usually have had. When gunga responds in his ad-hominems at "evo-losers" I know that its all hes got in his quiver, and that mere patience and scientific facts can win the discussions about the issue he deploys.

I used to be quite impatient regarding this and , over the last few years have developed more of a "quiet smile" while still (hopefully) retaining a sense of mutual interest that the subject demands.
Otherwise , itll quickly degrade into the name calling that closed down the "Evolution-How?" thread.
So my point is that we all just quit the feigned incredulity about the other sides. (Both sides need to do this). By so doing, we distill the topic down to its essential opils and do away with the spectre of name calling that aklways destroys a thread.

I dont know, maybe its just impossible to do.

Why the rage to support something which you clearly do not know jack **** about?

Just a mo. Lets assume that the feature off Cuba is a submerged city. How in the deuce does its presence prove anything but a fact that things subside.?

If we needed some proof of a worldwide flood, wouldnt we look for an example of a city like Machu Pichu showing evidence of flood deposits?

The city off Cuba would be a proof that (other than the obvious subsidence) that the ocean was actually LOWER in the past.

Gunga misses his mark again IMHO.

There's nothing wrong with people believing what they want but faith is no basis for BELIEF. It's a FAITH. People taking as FACT what they learned through their FAITH is absolute nonsense. It is illogical and unprovable.

The bible should not be taken literally. While many events can be verified, people's feelings, motivations, statements, etc. cannot.

There is NO EVIDENCE that Jesus said any of that stuff that has been ascribed to him in the bible. We don't know how Paul felt or what anyone's motivation was for any of their alleged actions or feelings. It is pure fantasy.

I don't think gunga and other believers are crazy; I do, however, think their statements of belief are illogical.

Jesus fundamentally changed the nature of religion on this Earth.

For instance, the whole world now accepts the idea that you cannot take material things with you. The day before Jesus was born, NOBODY believed that. Every sort of burial site you will ever find from prior to that time contains, aside from bones, all of the stuff the person thought he was taking with him.

The most major thing which Jesus said was that the future world is more important than this one, i.e. that we have to deal with this reality for 60 - 80 years or thereabouts, and then the future world is forever.

He also warned us against false prophets like Muhammed and Chuck Darwin, which was a valuable service to those bright enough to listen.

Jesus mentiond Darwin? Wow, he must have been a real prophet