Scientific Evidence of a Global Flood

originally posted by: edmc^2
Not really, heck I even believe and convinced that the earth at its early stages was completely under water millions or even billions of years ago.

So right there is a solid basis to based my belief on what the Bible says about a global flood.

Unless of course you're saying that the earth was never under water?

So humans were on the planet billions of years ago?

Sure the earth could have been underwater at some point, but not recently. All the evidence points to individual localized flooding, not a global flood.

originally posted by: Barcs

originally posted by: edmc^2
Not really, heck I even believe and convinced that the earth at its early stages was completely under water millions or even billions of years ago.

So right there is a solid basis to based my belief on what the Bible says about a global flood.

Unless of course you're saying that the earth was never under water?

So humans were on the planet billions of years ago?

Sure the earth could have been underwater at some point, but not recently. All the evidence points to individual localized flooding, not a global flood.

No. Just establishing the fact that a Global Flood is not just a Biblical account but a real event based on an already established proven geological record that the earth was under water at one point in time.

And that with this established fact, a Global Flood 4000 years ago can happen but DID indeed happened!

Like I said, the earth is still flooded. As the facts shows, seawater covers about 71 percent of the earth’s surface. Add to this the water that are locked in glaciers and polar ice caps in addition to caverns and water abysses deep underground. When combined as expected, the sea level would rise to cover cities like New York and Tokyo.

In other words, the Noah's Flood waters is/are still with us.

If you don't believe this, then explain to me where the excess water came from?

a reply to: edmc^2

Howdy,

I know I'm jumping the gun (I really should wait until you address the geological evidence against a global flood in my earlier post) but I think I can help you understand potentially where the Earth's water came from. See, scientists have a few theories based on the evidence available. As far as they can tell, a combination of devolatilization/outgassing of liquids as the Earth cooled as well as a bombardment of mostly asteroids based on isotopic ratios of hydrogen are perhaps the major sources... (this is the theory I was taught). Of course, there are other sources that likely contributed. One of the more popular theories (one that involves the ratio of isotopes of hydrogen found in lunar samples) involves the Earth being formed with the majority of its water already present, so less bombardment. Both theories work well to explain the water's origins, and as more evidence is discovered (perhaps sampling objects further away from the Earth in space) the theories will become more refined and we may be able to definitively say it happened one way or the other (or an entirely different way).
en.wikipedia.org...

That said, I am seriously anxious about your evidence for the global flood 4000 years ago. This is going to be BIG. I mean, the flood will change how geologists interpret oil fields, coal beds, mineral deposits, stratigraphic columns, metamorphism of rocks, probably (geo)chemistry too, and (geo)physics... I'd love to get in on this, as being the first geologist (as I hope to be one in just a short year) to know about this global flood evidence would be quite lucrative. I might even get a Nobel Prize. Don't worry though, I'll of course share my glory with you for sharing your evidence with me.

Sincere regards,
Hydeman

originally posted by: edmc^2
No. Just establishing the fact that a Global Flood is not just a Biblical account but a real event based on an already established proven geological record that the earth was under water at one point in time.

you are stretching of the facts to force a non event to align with scripture that is most definitely plagiarized from earlier literary sources that go back much further than 4000 BPE In your glee of thinking you found a loophole that allows the Hebrew text to appear to be actual history is neglecting many of the variables existing at the period in history that we definitively know that nearly the entire surface was water. For one, the atmosphere was nothing like it is now 2.5 billion yrs ago. The planet was transitioning from anaerobic life to aerobic life, from prokaryotic to eukaryotic. The continents were not anything like they are now, plate tectonics had yet to begin, there were no mountain ranges, the moon was much closer to earth thus its gravity and effects on tides were much stronger.

And that with this established fact, a Global Flood 4000 years ago can happen but DID indeed happened!

And your evidence for this is... ?!?!?! Even 2.5 bn BPE there simply was not enough water to cover mountains the height of the Himalayas which is exactly what your sacred text claims. You would need 9000 km of water, above sea level, world wide and for THAT, there is zero evidence. Trying to use the correlation to causation paradigm in an effort to establish the text as historically accurate is ludicrous in my opinion. Give me some facts to back up your version and I'd be happy to come over to that side. It just isn't there though.

Like I said, the earth is still flooded. As the facts shows, seawater covers about 71 percent of the earth’s surface. Add to this the water that are locked in glaciers and polar ice caps in addition to caverns and water abysses deep underground. When combined as expected, the sea level would rise to cover cities like New York and Tokyo.

as I mentioned just above this, there's a massive cognitive disconnect trying to equate sea level rise covering coastal cities that are near, at or below sea level and correlate that with water being able to cover mountains the height of the Himalayas. That amount of water was absolutely not in existence at any point in Earths history

In other words, the Noah's Flood waters is/are still with us.

If you don't believe this, then explain to me where the excess water came from?

Like Hydeman11, I'm on the edge of my seat anticipating your amazing explanation for how the flood occurred despite the physical and chemical obstacles it faced.
As mentioned in the first response to this post, the geologic, chemical and atmospheric conditions were drastically different 2.5 billion yrs ago. it can not be compared to what the earth look and acts like today.

a reply to: edmc^2

WRONG here is the world with the ice melted.



Very little land mass is lost and a lot is gained Greenland & Antarctica .

The world was never fully covered by water, parts that were under water in the VERY distant past no longer are the simple thing is MAN created god not the other way and it's easy to show because MAN created lots of god(s) all over the world that's why it's total BS.

They were used to explain what was not understood, can you explain why your all powerful god that YOU think created everything could only get his message across on a tiny part of the globe

Surely an all powerful being as you think could have got his message all over the world at the same time.

Here is a list of many of MAN's creations

Next time your at your place of worship ask them that question!!!

originally posted by: edmc^2

originally posted by: Barcs

originally posted by: edmc^2
Not really, heck I even believe and convinced that the earth at its early stages was completely under water millions or even billions of years ago.

So right there is a solid basis to based my belief on what the Bible says about a global flood.

Unless of course you're saying that the earth was never under water?

So humans were on the planet billions of years ago?

Sure the earth could have been underwater at some point, but not recently. All the evidence points to individual localized flooding, not a global flood.

No. Just establishing the fact that a Global Flood is not just a Biblical account but a real event based on an already established proven geological record that the earth was under water at one point in time.

And that with this established fact, a Global Flood 4000 years ago can happen but DID indeed happened!

Like I said, the earth is still flooded. As the facts shows, seawater covers about 71 percent of the earth’s surface. Add to this the water that are locked in glaciers and polar ice caps in addition to caverns and water abysses deep underground. When combined as expected, the sea level would rise to cover cities like New York and Tokyo.

In other words, the Noah's Flood waters is/are still with us.

If you don't believe this, then explain to me where the excess water came from?

So to follow your logic, because the earth might have been 95% covered in water 2.5 billion years ago, that means that a global flood can happen. Since a global flood can happen, it did happen 4000 years ago. So 1 + 1 = 25.8

You need to prove the water is excess or more than it should be. We are in an ice age, where the earth goes through cycles of warming and cooling. Glaciers melt and refreeze. The last cooling period ended around 10,000-12,000 years ago and there was flooding all over. But it was never the entire planet, certainly not in its current geological state. If the earth was flooded it was 2.5 billion years ago when most mountains had not even been formed yet.

originally posted by: Barcs

originally posted by: edmc^2

originally posted by: Barcs

originally posted by: edmc^2
Not really, heck I even believe and convinced that the earth at its early stages was completely under water millions or even billions of years ago.

So right there is a solid basis to based my belief on what the Bible says about a global flood.

Unless of course you're saying that the earth was never under water?

So humans were on the planet billions of years ago?

Sure the earth could have been underwater at some point, but not recently. All the evidence points to individual localized flooding, not a global flood.

No. Just establishing the fact that a Global Flood is not just a Biblical account but a real event based on an already established proven geological record that the earth was under water at one point in time.

And that with this established fact, a Global Flood 4000 years ago can happen but DID indeed happened!

Like I said, the earth is still flooded. As the facts shows, seawater covers about 71 percent of the earth’s surface. Add to this the water that are locked in glaciers and polar ice caps in addition to caverns and water abysses deep underground. When combined as expected, the sea level would rise to cover cities like New York and Tokyo.

In other words, the Noah's Flood waters is/are still with us.

If you don't believe this, then explain to me where the excess water came from?

So to follow your logic, because the earth might have been 95% covered in water 2.5 billion years ago, that means that a global flood can happen. Since a global flood can happen, it did happen 4000 years ago. So 1 + 1 = 25.8

You need to prove the water is excess or more than it should be. We are in an ice age, where the earth goes through cycles of warming and cooling. Glaciers melt and refreeze. The last cooling period ended around 10,000-12,000 years ago and there was flooding all over. But it was never the entire planet, certainly not in its current geological state. If the earth was flooded it was 2.5 billion years ago when most mountains had not even been formed yet.

Like I said - we're still flooded in that a huge amount of water are still locked up in the form of glaciers, ice caps, underground rivers/seas, water caverns / abysses. And if we combine these with the 71% existing water and lower the mountains and raised the sea basins, the earth will be covered with water 1000+ feet!

You can't dispute this fact!

In fact if we look at the average elevation / depth of the earth's surface (dry vs wet) this fact is well established.


For example, it's 'been established that the highest location above sea level is 8,850 m (29,035 ft) on the summit of Mount Everest in Nepal, and the lowest depth is 11,033 m (36,198 ft) beneath the Pacific Ocean at the bottom of the Mariana Trench. The lowest elevation on the continents is 408 m (1,340 ft) below sea level at the Dead Sea between Israel and Jordan.
The average elevation is 840 m or 2755 ft above sea level'.

geography.about.com...

And that:

The Earth's terrain varies greatly from place to place. About 70.8%[13] of the surface is covered by water, with much of the continental shelf below sea level. This equates to 361.132 million km2 (139.43 million sq mi).[89] The submerged surface has mountainous features, including a globe-spanning mid-ocean ridge system, as well as undersea volcanoes,[58] oceanic trenches, submarine canyons, oceanic plateaus and abyssal plains. The remaining 29.2% (148.94 million km2, or 57.51 million sq mi) not covered by water consists of mountains, deserts, plains, plateaus, and other geomorphologies.

en.wikipedia.org...

Now if we put these together - if we multiply the average depth of the seas by its respective surface area the volume of the World Ocean according to one finding will be 11 times the volume of the land above sea level (NEBritannica).

Imagine that 11x the volume of the land above sea level! We're truly still flooded.

So the question is not that a Global Flood is impossible to happen but when did it happen?

If you say 2.5 billion years ago then where did the glaciers, ice caps, underground rivers/seas, caverns / abysses containing huge amounts of water came from?

Mind you 75% of the earth’s fresh water is locked up in glaciers and polar ice caps. Now, where did these fresh water came from?

By what means they got to be where they are at?

Is it from comets / asteroids as suggested by some theories?

I doubt it because the mechanics and variables for depositing such a huge amount of water and freezing it in an instant is just not there.

A Global Flood 4000 years + ago as spoken in the Bible explains this very well!!

But good luck though in explaining your theory.

originally posted by: wmd_2008
a reply to: edmc^2

WRONG here is the world with the ice melted.

Very little land mass is lost and a lot is gained Greenland & Antarctica .

The world was never fully covered by water, parts that were under water in the VERY distant past no longer are the simple thing is MAN created god not the other way and it's easy to show because MAN created lots of god(s) all over the world that's why it's total BS.

They were used to explain what was not understood, can you explain why your all powerful god that YOU think created everything could only get his message across on a tiny part of the globe

Surely an all powerful being as you think could have got his message all over the world at the same time.

Here is a list of many of MAN's creations

Next time your at your place of worship ask them that question!!!

Now if you lower the mountains and raise the bottom of sea basins you will have an idea of how high the flooding will be earth-wide.

originally posted by: edmc^2

originally posted by: wmd_2008
a reply to: edmc^2

WRONG here is the world with the ice melted.

Very little land mass is lost and a lot is gained Greenland & Antarctica .

The world was never fully covered by water, parts that were under water in the VERY distant past no longer are the simple thing is MAN created god not the other way and it's easy to show because MAN created lots of god(s) all over the world that's why it's total BS.

They were used to explain what was not understood, can you explain why your all powerful god that YOU think created everything could only get his message across on a tiny part of the globe

Surely an all powerful being as you think could have got his message all over the world at the same time.

Here is a list of many of MAN's creations

Next time your at your place of worship ask them that question!!!

Now if you lower the mountains and raise the bottom of sea basins you will have an idea of how high the flooding will be earth-wide.

Sure, but as I pointed out before, you're speaking in hypotheticals. The scenario you keep harping on as evidence for a biblical flood 4000 BPE(at least that's your personal claim) has never actually existed, even when 97% of the earths surface area was covered in water 2.5 bn years ago. Even then the continental crust was not at the same elevation world wide. And that's entirely beside the fact that you have yet to produce any evidence for a total world encompassing flood event in recent human history. Written language was over 1500 years old at the time you claim this flood event occurred so why is there no written record of it and why did the basis for the story of Noah, Sumerian written text. Exist for a millennia prior to the time you claim the flood took place?

a reply to: peter vlar

Nope! I'm not as you say

stretching of the facts to force a non event to align with scripture that is most definitely plagiarized from earlier literary sources that go back much further than 4000 BPE In your glee of thinking you found a loophole that allows the Hebrew text to appear to be actual history is neglecting many of the variables existing at the period in history that we definitively know that nearly the entire surface was water.

But rather stating the facts.

That is, the mountains that we see today were at a much lower elevation thousands of years, even millions of years ago. And the Sea Basins shallower. So to use the Noah's Flood today as a model to flood the earth will not work because the earth surface is totally different from before the Deluge. We have to be in the same condition when the flood came to overcome the obstacles you've mentioned.

To quote again one finding:

“The average depth of all the seas has been estimated at 3,790 metres (12,430 feet), a figure considerably larger than that of the average elevation of the land above the sea level, which is 840 metres (2,760 feet). If the average depth is multiplied by its respective surface area, the volume of the World Ocean is 11 times the volume of the land above sea level.”

- The New Encyclopædia Britannica, 1987, Vol. 25, p. 124.


Yet, even at present stage, as indicated by scientific findings, coastal cities like Tokyo to New York will be inundated with water if the ice caps had melted. Now just imagine, mountains lowering and sea floors rising, underground water bursting, think a global flood is impossible?

I don't think so based on these facts!

So again, where did these excess water came from if NOT from the Global Flood?

a reply to: edmc^2

Howdy,

I'm still waiting for you to respond to my post explaining to you some basic geology... It's not hypothetical evidence, it's real evidence, and I took a long time compiling it for you. I do so hope that you'll actually address the evidence with evidence of your own. (I really want that Nobel Prize. I walk past one in my university [a model of the one actually received by one of the people at my university] and the taste of scientific discovery on such a magnitude would be sweet indeed. Here's a link, in case you can't find my post.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Now as for the post I am currently replying to...

That's a lovely hypothetical situation you're putting forth. Did you know that if the Earth had red skies, the skies would be red? You can't dispute that fact. And seeing as there is no reason that the atmospheric gases could not be different on Earth, it's not a matter of if the sky was ever red, but when the sky was ever red.

Now, I've also replied about the origin of water, which I provided some basic evidence for. You seemingly saw it, as you are ignoring it... No, sorry, acknowledging it but ignoring the content. If you want to understand how the Earth has changed over time, check out an Earth history textbook, the geology kind. Real useful texts. Of course, you could also take a look at this free source of information...
en.wikipedia.org...

You will notice that no scientist is claiming "spontaneous flooding" or "instantaneous glaciation." In fact, glaciation of the Earth is a relatively recent development in Earth history, but one that has occurred a few times and for different reasons. I refer you to the above source again. Really, the only people who must claim quick glaciation (on an instantaneous way) are young Earth creationists. People who are scientifically literate have billions of years, millions of years, lots of time to freeze things or to accumulate water from volcanic outgassing and comets/asteroids. I will refer you again to my previous post on the matter, and because you have acknowledged it, I assume you know where to find it.

Now, I will again ask you to respond to the geological evidence against a "Great Deluge" in my first link in this current reply. Please argue with evidence, not hypothetical scenarios based on conjecture.

Sincere regards,
Hydeman

originally posted by: edmc^2


Like I said, the earth is still flooded. As the facts shows, seawater covers about 71 percent of the earth’s surface.

Just because we have oceans doesn't mean there has been a global flood.
Reading this thread makes me tired.

originally posted by: peter vlar

originally posted by: edmc^2

originally posted by: wmd_2008
a reply to: edmc^2

WRONG here is the world with the ice melted.

Very little land mass is lost and a lot is gained Greenland & Antarctica .

The world was never fully covered by water, parts that were under water in the VERY distant past no longer are the simple thing is MAN created god not the other way and it's easy to show because MAN created lots of god(s) all over the world that's why it's total BS.

They were used to explain what was not understood, can you explain why your all powerful god that YOU think created everything could only get his message across on a tiny part of the globe

Surely an all powerful being as you think could have got his message all over the world at the same time.

Here is a list of many of MAN's creations

Next time your at your place of worship ask them that question!!!

Now if you lower the mountains and raise the bottom of sea basins you will have an idea of how high the flooding will be earth-wide.

Sure, but as I pointed out before, you're speaking in hypotheticals. The scenario you keep harping on as evidence for a biblical flood 4000 BPE(at least that's your personal claim) has never actually existed, even when 97% of the earths surface area was covered in water 2.5 bn years ago. Even then the continental crust was not at the same elevation world wide. And that's entirely beside the fact that you have yet to produce any evidence for a total world encompassing flood event in recent human history. Written language was over 1500 years old at the time you claim this flood event occurred so why is there no written record of it and why did the basis for the story of Noah, Sumerian written text. Exist for a millennia prior to the time you claim the flood took place?

OK even if we say the earth was flooded 2.5 billion years ago, where did the rest of the water went then?

How old do you say the glaciers and ice caps are?

originally posted by: edmc^2
a reply to: peter vlar

Nope! I'm not as you say

stretching of the facts to force a non event to align with scripture that is most definitely plagiarized from earlier literary sources that go back much further than 4000 BPE In your glee of thinking you found a loophole that allows the Hebrew text to appear to be actual history is neglecting many of the variables existing at the period in history that we definitively know that nearly the entire surface was water.

But rather stating the facts.

That is, the mountains that we see today were at a much lower elevation thousands of years, even millions of years ago. And the Sea Basins shallower. So to use the Noah's Flood today as a model to flood the earth will not work because the earth surface is totally different from before the Deluge. We have to be in the same condition when the flood came to overcome the obstacles you've mentioned.

To quote again one finding:

“The average depth of all the seas has been estimated at 3,790 metres (12,430 feet), a figure considerably larger than that of the average elevation of the land above the sea level, which is 840 metres (2,760 feet). If the average depth is multiplied by its respective surface area, the volume of the World Ocean is 11 times the volume of the land above sea level.”

- The New Encyclopædia Britannica, 1987, Vol. 25, p. 124.


Yet, even at present stage, as indicated by scientific findings, coastal cities like Tokyo to New York will be inundated with water if the ice caps had melted. Now just imagine, mountains lowering and sea floors rising, underground water bursting, think a global flood is impossible?

I don't think so based on these facts!

So again, where did these excess water came from if NOT from the Global Flood?

You're making claims of a flood that happened 4000 years ago. The mountains we see today. Have been, in some instances , in existence for hundreds of millions of years. The Appalachian mountains are nearly 500 million years old, the Rockies are around 300 million years old, Himalayas roughly 80 million years old. THere is absolutely NO, ZERO, NULL, VOID, correlation to a biblical flood event at all.

A for excess water, what are you referring to the water locked in polar ice caps? Are you claiming that it is "excess" water because it is fresh water? I certainly hope not because its one of the most basic things learned in chemistry. When water freezes, the salt (to some extent - depending on the speed that the water freezes) gets squeezed out because the salt does not fit well into the crystal structure of ice. Water that is less salty freezes before water that is more salty. So as some water freezes, the part that is left gets more salty and takes lower temperature to freeze. This process repeats and repeats till you are left with pockets of unfrozen water that are high in salt concentration. These occur in the permafrost and are where some very cold- tolerant bacteria can live. These bacteria also have to tolerate high salt levels too.

Regardless of all if this, the geology and geography of the Earth in 2014 is no different than in 2000 BPE which is when YOU claim the flood took place.

Now Ill ask YOU again, what is your evidence that a flood actually occurs when you claim it did?

originally posted by: edmc^2

originally posted by: peter vlar

originally posted by: edmc^2

originally posted by: wmd_2008
a reply to: edmc^2

WRONG here is the world with the ice melted.

Very little land mass is lost and a lot is gained Greenland & Antarctica .

The world was never fully covered by water, parts that were under water in the VERY distant past no longer are the simple thing is MAN created god not the other way and it's easy to show because MAN created lots of god(s) all over the world that's why it's total BS.

They were used to explain what was not understood, can you explain why your all powerful god that YOU think created everything could only get his message across on a tiny part of the globe

Surely an all powerful being as you think could have got his message all over the world at the same time.

Here is a list of many of MAN's creations

Next time your at your place of worship ask them that question!!!

Now if you lower the mountains and raise the bottom of sea basins you will have an idea of how high the flooding will be earth-wide.

Sure, but as I pointed out before, you're speaking in hypotheticals. The scenario you keep harping on as evidence for a biblical flood 4000 BPE(at least that's your personal claim) has never actually existed, even when 97% of the earths surface area was covered in water 2.5 bn years ago. Even then the continental crust was not at the same elevation world wide. And that's entirely beside the fact that you have yet to produce any evidence for a total world encompassing flood event in recent human history. Written language was over 1500 years old at the time you claim this flood event occurred so why is there no written record of it and why did the basis for the story of Noah, Sumerian written text. Exist for a millennia prior to the time you claim the flood took place?

OK even if we say the earth was flooded 2.5 billion years ago, where did the rest of the water went then?

How old do you say the glaciers and ice caps are?

I guess you've never heard of evaporation or our atmosphere if you're seriously asking where could water go. Any of the various asteroid or comet impacts that have assaulted early earth are more than capable of blasting massive amounts of water into the atmosphere. 2.5 bn YA is when the earth first started creating enough O2 that it beca,e part of the atmosphere. At the point the earth was switching from anaerobic to aerobic life and from prokaryotic to eukaryotic processes as a result of the newly abundant O2 in the atmosphere.

I'm not sure when the northern ice cap formed because unlike the one in Antarctica, its not actually a solid cap. It's comprised of pack ice, ice burgs and a thin shell of frozen sea water. The Antarctic cap is a little over 33 million years old.

I also need to point out to you that just because the Earth was covered in water until 2.5 bn YA does not mean that there was a flood.

a reply to: edmc^2

Are you aware that comets containing salt water have been discovered? It's very possible the earth has been hit with a salt water comet on more than one occasion. There was some kind of event 7000- 8000 years ago. This was after the glacial period had ended, so it's unrelated. Suppose a comet containing salt water crashed into the Indian ocean. It would make sense based on the reading below. You can see the glacial period coming to an end around 10,000 years ago. Then, unexpectedly a big drop, followed by a warm spike. There most certainly would have been flooding, and all kinds of devastation throughout the planet and could explain the numerous flood myths around Africa, Europe and Asia. If only you weren't stuck on the "4000 year" and "entire planet at once" things. You may be on to something. Why would god make it rain for 40 days and 40 nights. It's far easier to just send a comet. No doubt it would storm for at least 40 days after something like that. It was a global flood only in the sense that it was their world that was flooded. It's all they knew.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: tsingtao

Well so you are suggesting that god made it physically possible for an ark of those dimensions to be built by a man who had never been a shipwright in his life to be built and stay together? Then for said ark to be able to hold two of every animal on the planet? THEN flood the earth with more water than exists on the planet. THEN once flood is over, remove ALL evidence of said flood occurring. THEN help noah properly distribute every animal back to where ever they came from like they never left?

Yeah that all makes PERFECT sense.

we ARE talking about God, aren't we?

why is anyone surprised?
because a few things don't fit nicely with what has been drilled into their heads?

the whole thing took a year. or so.
how long did the tsunami of 2004 take to recede?
and no God involved.

noah used "gopherwood" (sp)
what is that?

God told lots of people to do things they had no idea about.
i think the worst case was Jonah. lol.
but he got there and did it! took longer than it should have but he was a better man for the experience.

meh, 2 of every animal, non starter. according to the movie, they all came to russel crowe.
even bruce/evan had them gathering at the ark.
bible says so too.

it actually doesn't say much about that whole flood thing anyway. creation either, for that matter.

FWIW, goliath is the most described person in the whole bible.

like i said, you want to talk religion or science?

can't do both at the same time, honestly.

originally posted by: tsingtao

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: tsingtao

Well so you are suggesting that god made it physically possible for an ark of those dimensions to be built by a man who had never been a shipwright in his life to be built and stay together? Then for said ark to be able to hold two of every animal on the planet? THEN flood the earth with more water than exists on the planet. THEN once flood is over, remove ALL evidence of said flood occurring. THEN help noah properly distribute every animal back to where ever they came from like they never left?

Yeah that all makes PERFECT sense.

we ARE talking about God, aren't we?

We are but it would have been much easier for God to have done something completely different if he was just going to help Noah succeed every step of the way. Why give a physically impossible task to someone then magic it into possibility? Just magic out the end result instead of going through such a roundabout way of killing off all these unclean people.

Like why didn't god just make it so that the animals were able to live in the water until the flood receded? Or heck why couldn't god have just killed all the sinners with pinpoint accuracy? Why did he have to destroy the planet in the first place? If we are talking about all these violations of physics that god would have to do to make this "adventure" possible, why such a stupid and inane way of going about it? There would be FAR more efficient ways of doing this.

why is anyone surprised?
because a few things don't fit nicely with what has been drilled into their heads?

Because none of it makes any sense and you have to jump through some really logical holes to make the pieces fit. It's better to just scrap the whole story then to try to rationalize how such a stupid story could be possible.

the whole thing took a year. or so.
how long did the tsunami of 2004 take to recede?
and no God involved.

No god was involved with the flood myth either, because it was a myth.

noah used "gopherwood" (sp)
what is that?

Who knows? It's still wood and wooden ships of the ark's size break apart.

God told lots of people to do things they had no idea about.
i think the worst case was Jonah. lol.

You try to prove your point with a myth that is even more ridiculous than the noah account. Wow...

but he got there and did it! took longer than it should have but he was a better man for the experience.

Yeah... No.

meh, 2 of every animal, non starter. according to the movie, they all came to russel crowe.
even bruce/evan had them gathering at the ark.
bible says so too.

Two of every animal CANNOT repopulate a species. The genetic diversity would be nonexistent and the inbreeding would get so bad that the species would go extinct. Besides, you are telling me that platypuses and kangaroos came to the middle east all the way from Australia? That the animals of north and south america did the same? If they were able to cross the oceans separating them from their destinations, why did they need to board the ark in the first place?

And we still haven't discussed how Noah fed these animals. How did he keep the carnivores from eating the other animals? If all the space on the ship was taken up by animals (not sure how they all fit in the first place though), where did the food go?

it actually doesn't say much about that whole flood thing anyway. creation either, for that matter.

So the better question is, why do you make up things to try to make the flood myth work logically? Maybe you should just accept it for what it is, a story and a myth.

FWIW, goliath is the most described person in the whole bible.

like i said, you want to talk religion or science?

can't do both at the same time, honestly.

Sure you can. Science studies things and through its acquisition of knowledge it shows that the accounts of religion are impossible. So then we discard those stories as mythology. Like I've been saying since the beginning of the thread, there is literally zero evidence of a global flood happening in the historic record and one occurring is scientifically impossible. To even entertain the idea that it happened is to deny reality. You might as well just deny all science.

a reply to: glitchinthematrix

Hey, ATS, I hope you'll join in the conversation. Present your evidence...preferably unbiased.

I can't really say that I am not unbiased because that is really not the case. I am biased and in my mind I am one of those crazies that the sciences laugh at.

Of course we are all discussing theology or at least we should be. In theology we cannot insist that all is fact when it is actually theory. For those that disbelieve the bible that also is theory isn’t it? So let’s all be on the same page in discussing Noah.

If we are then let’s factor in some other theories. Are we positive that the antediluvian dates are correct? Could it be that Noah (if he existed) was on a six month equinox and not a 360 days lunar calendar? Is it a fact that the world was 71 percent water and 29 percent land at this time? Is it a fact that this world was entirely populated at this time of the supposed flood? Could it be that the animal kingdom was so small in number that it indeed did fit in the ark?

According to the bible the earth had not known rain in Noah’s day. Genesis 1:9 says the entire world was one body of land and one body of water. What if the known earth available in Noah's day was 10 percent land and 90 percent water and that even at 10 percent not all of the 10 percent was inhabited? Well, we don’t know the percentages but I do believe they were not as they are today and in fact I believe the land percentage was greatly smaller then as compared to now and that the world was far from being inhabited. Also there is the theory as to which part of the world was one body of land at this time. We simply are not told.

We are also told in Genesis 10:25 that in the days of Eber was the earth divided. Eber lived 464 years and was born in 1723 After Creation. At his birth Noah was 667 years old. This means that 67 years after the flood to 537 years after the flood was the window of when the earth was divided by islands, waterways and the like. Till then we assume that there was still only one body of water on the earth. It is theorized that during this window of 637 years is when this ratio (whatever it was) then changed.

Now when the land became separated could mean that water increased from the subterranean or it could mean that land rose up from the present waters. It could mean that as ice began to form at the poles that more land appeared. We simply have nothing as fact.

It is an accepted assumption by the Jewish Time line Encyclopedia to list the flood of Noah as being in 1656 After the creation of Adam. Now what if the editors of the commentaries of Torah are wrong and Noah was on a six month equinox calendar and not on a 360 day lunar calendar as supposed by the translators and editors of today? That would place the Adamic Noah at 828 solar years after the creation of Adam and not 1656 years. Would that change minds? Maybe not but it would show that the breath of life could have been much smaller than what we are imagining today. According to Genesis and the Eber account this could mean that the flood occurred in 828 instead of 1656 and that the earth became divided in the window of 318.5 years instead of the 637 years. As you can see, dating is very important to establish and presents different pictures.

Then let us also factor in the flood account that states that there were subterranean waters also involved in this flood.

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 infer that there were vast subterranean waters under the known body of surface water and that they heaved up and the plates of this earth were broken as we see them today. These subterranean waters were the main force of the flooding and creating mountains. I also believe that this was spontaneous and lasted only long enough to kill the life forms left on the earth. I also am not convinced that the surface waters were salty at this time. It could be that the subterranean waters broke their boundaries and the present ocean beds became salty as a result.

If the land mass of Noah's day was but a fraction of our land mass today then it would fit in with most of the Moses account. Moses tells us that Adam named all the known animals in his day and that there was about 125 years or so between their lives. So it could be a fair assumption that the number of life forms were about the same at this time of Noah. Is it fair to assume that God only rested on that seventh day but created after His rest and is still creating? The reason is this. Is it fair to assume that Adam named all life forms as we see them today or that he only named what was presented to him at his time? Moses infers that creation and made from creation are two matters to digest.

To make an automobile from created sources is not to say that the automobile was created but was made. Oh I suppose some could use the terminology that it was a creation of so and so but in all reality it was made from existing substances. Applying this to the present day, can we suppose that God is still making from His creations? Something to think about.

Could it be that the antediluvian world was indeed one small land mass with one body of fresh water and four rivers to carry the water throughout the land? Could it be that this land mass encompassed the tropical area of this world and that it was indeed not all inhabited by life. Could it be that the canopy of atmosphere also became changed with clouds of water and cyclic seasons? Could the Genesis account be more accurate than is given credit? Could Noah have existed, built his ark and indeed saved the existing life of this antediluvian world?

Now I do realize that the sciences and dating of today counter about all of my theology but if this world did experience a world catastrophe so great as to even change the land mass and atmosphere then perhaps the science of that era has also changed.

a reply to: hydeman11

Howdy,

A quick reply to your previous post:

It took me a while as there was so much data to read through.

Anyway, right off the bat I do agree with what you said. That the

"Earth is not smooth or even ellipsoidal, and the Earth is not made of uniform rock throughout. The crust, and thus the gravity, differs based on location."

.
Yes, no disagreement there since it's an established fact. But it does not mean that a Global Flood is only a hypothetical event. No, in fact just by going back in time, by lowering the mountain tops and raising the sea floors, we can readily see how its impact on the water levels throughout the world! It will drastically rise and there will be a lot less land to inhabit. Agree or not you know that I'm correct!

Mind you, this is only changing the surface (elevation) of the earth, the effect is already obvious.
But if we add to it the water volumes found in glaciers, ice caps, all underground water deposits, is there anymore doubt of further increasing the water level earthwide? What do you think?

Of course it will! Thousands feet over!

To quote again what is stated in the New Encyclopaedia Britanica, it said that:

“The average depth of all the seas has been estimated at 3,790 metres (12,430 feet), a figure considerably larger than that of the average elevation of the land above the sea level, which is 840 metres (2,760 feet). If the average depth is multiplied by its respective surface area, the volume of the World Ocean is 11 times the volume of the land above sea level.”

(NEB 1987, Vol. 25, p. 124)

So again this is NOT a hypothetical argument but facts based on sound scientific findings - of which I might add you can't argue against.

Furthermore if we consider the mechanics of the release of these billions of tons of water from a very high elevation, from the atmosphere, with such tremendous rate of fall, what would be the effect on the earth's thin crust? A great deal, such that the tectonic plates will move and push old mountains to higher elevation and sea basins to a deeper level! This will result in the buckling of the earth's crust, opening up trenches, caverns and abysses deep underground, prompting the displacement of the tectonic plates!

This will also result in a sudden climate change. Allowing more radiation to penetrate the earth and plunging temperatures to extremes. So extreme that it can freeze animals while still alive.

And with tremendous force, at high speed, the fast approaching flood can carry large granite boulders from far flung regions including marine life forms and other life forms to be deposited where they ought not.

Think it can't happen? Well we have evidence these events. We have examples of boulders being carried by flash floods. We have tsunamis that can uproot entire town including buildings built on solid foundations. We evidence of the earth crust bent (not broken) downward/upward. The power of Nature is something to behold when released!

As for the metamorphoric rocks, I have no argument there either. It's how nature works - it recycles things - for lack of a better word. And it's true, metamorphic rocks can contain marine life forms and other life forms but it does not however invalidate nor contradict the power of moving water, particularly in depositing fossilized life forms. In fact lithification / metamorphosis require water for the process to even take place.

astro.hopkinsschools.org...

As to your question below:

...the fact that trilobites exist in the strata of Mt. Everest would mean the flood would have had to been in or before the Permian, yes?"

No if you mean Noah's Flood. It's not for the simple fact that a timeline was provided when it occurred - 4000+ years ago (i.e c 2370 BC).

This is supported by the fact that a large number of fossilized sea shells of various types are found on the surface many mountain tops - from the Grand Teton to the Himalayas. Not just in the thousands but in the millions! Not only that. Whale fossils are also being found at higher elevations including bones of various animals in caves high up in the hills.

www.nps.gov...
www.nytimes.com...

In addition the trilobites that exist in the strata of Mt. Everest, supports the idea or the fact that at one point in time these mountain ranges were submerge underwater and due to uplift and various geologic processes as you mentioned they became part of the metamorphic rocks that eventually created the mountains. Again I see no contradiction but a confirmation.

Like you said:

"these fossil fragments have been interpreted as redeposited after the original beds were weathered and eroded".

As for the date of the original trilobite being around 250mya, it's still a suspect and a source of intense debate since radioactive materials are dated according to the radioactive isotopes present on rocks not the long gone carbon life form.

www.fossilmuseum.net...

As for the theory of where the water in the ice caps came from - nice theory or I should say hypothesis. Unfortunately it lacks substance, thus it's purely hypothetical.

For example is stated the following:

...
During Hadean time (4.6–4 Ga), the Solar System was forming, probably within a large cloud of gas and dust around the sun, called an accretion disc from which Earth formed ...

Earth was initially molten due to extreme volcanism and frequent collisions with other bodies. Eventually, the outer layer of the planet cooled to form a solid crust when water began accumulating in the atmosphere. The Moon formed soon afterwards, possibly as the result of a Mars-sized object with about 10% of the Earth's mass[4] impacting the planet in a glancing blow.[5] Some of this object's mass merged with the Earth, significantly altering its internal composition, and a portion was ejected into space. Some of the material survived to form an orbiting moon. Outgassing and volcanic activity produced the primordial atmosphere. Condensing water vapor, augmented by ice delivered from comets, produced the oceans.[6]

During the Hadean the Late Heavy Bombardment occurred (approximately 4,100 to 3,800 million years ago) during which a large number of impact craters are believed to have formed on the Moon, and by inference on Earth, Mercury, Venus and Mars as well.

en.wikipedia.org...

Although hypothetical, I must admit it has some kernel of truth. Like in this statement:

Earth was initially molten due to extreme volcanism and frequent collisions with other bodies. Eventually, the outer layer of the planet cooled to form a solid crust when water began accumulating in the atmosphere.

Compare with these Biblical statements:

[Gen 1:2 DBY] 2 And the earth was waste and empty, and darkness was on the face of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters."...

(oops went over my allowed text count)

continued...