It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: np6888
a reply to: Tangerine
You're assuming that everything has to happen "naturally," I assume that things can happen supernaturally. Which of us is making this a loaded question? I say unless you can go back in time 6000 years ago, or be everywhere at once in both time and space, you can't rule out anything. In fact, you can't even be sure that there aren't UFOs that just appeared and disappeared in some parts of the Sahara, Siberia, etc. right now. You can't be sure that there aren't UFOs trying to control global warming (don't know about you, but it seems a lot less hot here than in past summers, and we're well into August already), or helping reducing the effects of nuclear radiation at Fukushima right now(well, they've done that already, just making a point here). Heck, you can't be sure that they aren't the ones who fixed Chernobyl and restored wildlife, when no one was "looking."
originally posted by: np6888
a reply to: Xtrozero
If we came from Africa, then how do they manage to find human footprints in the UK from 800,000 years ago? How did they get there? Read about the history of England.
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Jesuslives4u
Apparently so do you since Carbon 14 dating isn't used to date things when it exceeds 100,000 years. Also where is that source from? You just posted a random quote with no sourced information. Not to mention it is incorrect since the half-life of C-14 is about 5730 years which you'll notice is greater than 4000 years, and that's just ONE half-life.
originally posted by: Jesuslives4u
a reply to: Rex282
A well written post - thank you! But of course you must agree that both sides of this debate automatically die when one screams "SHOW ME THE FACTS" Neither side can prover that their side is correct. It is all based on theory from scientist. Who by the way swing both sides. So saying their was not a worldwide flood is also incorrect.
originally posted by: Jesuslives4u
a reply to: Rex282
So saying their was not a worldwide flood is also incorrect.
TextGen_7:11 In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month, the same day were all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened.
While suggested historically, since the recognition of plate tectonics in the 1970s, scientific consensus has rejected any significant expansion or contraction of Earth.
originally posted by: np6888
a reply to: Ironclad2000
The Bible doesn't tell everything. Like I've said, they don't mention Noah's daughters, It's also possible that God created more animals after the flood but it doesn't get mentioned(just like not all stories except for Abraham's get mentioned).
Also, did you know that in Vietnamese, land and Earth are almost interchangeable(literal translation of Earth is "circle of land.") Earth is a very modern word, and is actually a name for our planet. It's possible that by earth, they mean land, though I'm not certain.
So basically for your hypothesis to hold true, you'd have to reject Plate Tectonics Theory. Do you?
originally posted by: Seede
a reply to: Krazysh0t
So basically for your hypothesis to hold true, you'd have to reject Plate Tectonics Theory. Do you?
I am not privy to this expertise. I really could not say but only suspect. I do not know that what we have today are the results of the "great deep broken up." I have nothing to really verify my thoughts.
Genesis is translated "and the windows of heaven were opened" which is taught that it means water from the heaven. I have heard several accounts of that interpretation but to me it means that it rained. By that I understand "the fountains of the great deep broken up" could mean (to me) that some thing inside the earth had a great upheaval. Don't really know. Could it be possible that our entire world had a great catastrophic upheaval of some sort and what we have today
is the result of whatever happened?
I am not even sure of the percentage of land mass then compared to today. Could the land mass have been much less in that era which could explain that we had a much smaller world in the days of Noah than we have today? Would it also explain that the animal life and species could have been much smaller than we see today?
There could be so many variables which I am not even aware of. The water must be still here or the world flood did not exist as we see the world today. I cannot believe that the waters simply disappeared.
Reading a book on Mars, some time back, brought this thought to me that perhaps the water on Mars is still there. Could it be that Mars had the same thing happen as our world? They might have vast oceans under land mass the same as we have. The only difference is that they do not have 29% land mass but 100% land mass. Would that conflict with the tectonic plates theory?
Any thoughts?
While Mars no longer appears to be geologically active, we see from surface features that it once was very Earth-like in its geological processes. The surface of Mars plays host to the largest volcano in the Solar System, Olympus Mons, and a huge rift valley called Valles Marineris.
And it is this rift valley that indicates that Mars does in fact have tectonic plates. When analysing this ‘crack’ in the surface of Mars, scientists have found that the ‘matching sides’ are separated by a horizontal distance of 150 kilometres (93 miles). This suggests that the surface of Mars is effectively two large tectonic plates that were rubbing by each other.
However, since Mars cooled down much more rapidly than Earth, and therefore the molten rock beneath the plates has solidified, the process of tectonic plate formation appears to have ground to a halt
originally posted by: Seede
a reply to: skalla
TextGen_7:11 In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month, the same day were all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened.
Noah’s Flood
Just a theory of mine.
Is it possible that the rain was not the cause of the flood? It may have rained for forty days and nights but the water from the rain might not have been the true cause of the flood.
We actually do not know the percentage of land that was exposed in that day but I am simply theorizing that perhaps it could have been less or even more than today. Today it is estimated that 71% of this world is water while only 29% is land. [
The clue that I have noted is in Genesis –
Gen_7:11 In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month, the same day were all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened.
Could that mean that the land, under the 71% water, upheaved pushing the 71% waters of the deep to cover the remaining 29% of land mass? In other words could the inside of the earth have expanded heaving the land under the waters up and forcing the waters (along with the rain) to cover the remaining 29% of exposed land? That may explain the Genesis account insofar as the flooding is concerned. Now along with this could it have been a world upheaval creating mountains and valleys?
It may have been an expansion of magma (type of explosion) or some other cause. So in reality that could explain (to me) that the water is still exactly where it has always been.
Any thoughts?
originally posted by: theMediator
There is so much water underground that a giant flood is something that I believe in.
We have no idea how advanced earth life could of been in the last million years.
Noah could have just gathered DNA from ''pure'' animals and wait on a spaceship of some sort while the flood was destroying most of the earth.