Do you believe their was a worldwide flood?

You mean intense heating causing the water to erupt as steam, boiling fish and everything else alive? getting a quantity of water of the size out of the earth would require a huge amount of pressure (and a change in this amount from before to after the flood), and would generate a large amount of heat.

 

A "few" thousand. I guess you've been sleeping the last only 2000 years and failed to see the rise and fall of countless civilizations and the rediculous amount of diversity that has cropped up.

So what do you assume is the correct amount of diversity?

That might explain the magma now wouldn't it? And the heat is only at the source spraying up into the air. It'll cool and rain back down. It's not like all the land just disappeared. The water shot up through the cracks. Last I checked, fish don't live on land. Fishies live in the sea where the temperature stayed pretty much the same.

Like massive chunks of land collapsing into the sink hole.

http://www.livescience.com/environment/070228_beijing_anomoly.html

 

Except most of that heat would exit with the water in jets of steam, frying plants and animals, including fish.

Which still isn't nearly the volume of water you need, and which would have destroyed much of the geology of the overlying region. Not to mention the problem of somehow generating that pressure in the first place.

 

What fish live on the land where the jets of water were shooting up? Even the Bible agrees that everything living on the earth died. The fish were not really affected.

 

So it's fountains of the land and not fountains of the deep? Even if this is somehow accurate with the text, jets of steam escaping at high temperature and pressure would poach Noah in his ark as well, in addition to causing huge geological disruption (which is not present) as water pounds out of the earth with a large amount of force and releases energy. You still have no mechanism for generating this pressure in the first place, and absolutely no evidence for a sufficient quantity of water. Moving it all to the surface in forty days is equally ridiculous, as pressure would drop off as water was released, keeping much of it trapped underground. Your fish die anyway due to changing levels of salinity. Fresh water fish would have been wiped out.

 

No, I don't even go that far. I completely deny the existence of God's Purpose, thus how your organisation interact with it is irrelevant.

But since it seems so important to you, what organisation are we talking about?

 

Rising and falling civilisations is not what it is all about. So what if there was a Greek Empire which fell, only to be replaced by a Roman empire, which was somewhat much the same. Falling and re-establishing empires is not remarkable. Completely unrelated empires which have clearly established religions, histories and cultures IS.

So while maybe the diversity of cultures found in the middles east, europe and africa could be accepted, i have trouble accepting the indians, the aztecs, the mayans, the australian aborigines, the maoris of new Zealand etc etc.

More importantly, I think it needs to be noted how you ahve completely ignored all of the other self-affirming points which i have mentioned. They were only the first few to my head, but as usual, you ahve taken one which you think you can easily ridicule and you try to pick it apart with seeds of doubt. Completely ignoring the fact that it is only one element of a many pieced puzzle which all fit together.

Each piece is independently damning of the flood story, but together they tell teh whole story. And no creationist ever likes to look at the whole picture. Only one piece at a time so they can so seeds of doubt to the ignorant.

 

So what you're trying to convince us all of is that if jets of water shot out of China, everyone in america would be poached.

is that what you're trying to tell us?

and?

 

And, continue ignoring everything else I have said, and I see no point discussing the finer details of something which is self apparent without the details.

The great diversity of human culture did not develop within the last 6000 years. Just one more point of many which proves the flood didn't happen.

 

It's very important to me indeed. However, you deny it even before having any knowledge of it. Just shows how closed minded you are.

You seem to make it known you are very intelligent and do quite a lot of analysis and research on things that concern you. However, you fail to do any analysis or research of me and the organization I choose to belong to. Even a few minutes spent on this would reveal this information if you so chose.

If you care to then maybe you will find out. If you don't care, then....

Col

 

what a load of...

It shows no such thing. it shows how little tyou understand about how a discussion on a topic should go. i have explained this 3 or 4 times now, and you either ignore me, don't understand what i have said, or you are just be stubbornly ignorant.

If I am wrong, and who you are and your organisation does in some how impact upon this topic (like say, maybe your organisation is the organisation which can trace back a direct line of descendency to noah and you have accurate chronicals of every year since then), then you should be able to argue for the point. Instead you continue to just ignore what i say and decry what I do as being close minded.

I'm the one continually putting myself out there. You are so close minded that you won't actually engage. You keep meta-talking. You talk about what we should talk about. You talk about how we are doing this discussion, but you won't partake in it.

..and you tell me you don't like philosophy because it is jsut talk. Try actualyl talking instead of meta-talking and you might see the value in actual talk.

 

Opinions don't prove anything. You're making assumptions about how fast cultures develop. People used to think it took thousands/millions of years for things to change. There was a guy who bred and domesticated wolves. Within a few short generations he had dogs. It only takes one generation of interactial procreation to start a new "race."

The fact is you're just making stuff up.

 

Your basis for believing in the flood story is a single unsupported book, and you question my bases for evidence.

You are still ignoring the list of reasons, so I'll mention them again (I'd hate for them to be forgotten!)

Before we get back to your favourite, human culture, I just want to point out one thing: When you say the flood was real, you are systematically declaring that every paleontologist on earth is wrong. Every molecular biologist is wrong. Every anthropologist on earth is wrong. Every physicist is wrong about radiometric dating.

You systematically deny all of the accumulated human knowledge, just because it disagrees with one myth in one book. And ironically, you will just as quickly jump on the bandwagon when that same science you deny finds something which supports one of the stories in the bible.

And that being said, I think it is time to just end this: try reading this, please, for the sake of accepting reality:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-noahs-ark.html
Why did the Flood not leave traces on the sea floors?
Why is there no evidence of a flood in tree ring dating?
How do you explain the relative ages of mountains?
Why is there no evidence of a flood in ice core series?
How are the polar ice caps even possible?
Why are geological eras consistent worldwide?
How was the fossil record sorted in an order convenient for evolution?
How does a global flood explain angular unconformities?
How can a single flood be responsible for such extensively detailed layering?
How could a flood have deposited chalk?
How could the Flood deposit layers of solid salt?
How does a flood explain the accuracy of "coral clocks"?
Where were all the fossilized animals when they were alive?
Where did all the organic material in the fossil record come from?
How do you explain the relative commonness of aquatic fossils?

and on and on and on and on...

Did I mention that a flood was impossible?

 

And just to really make a point here: Anyone who can read that article I just posted a link to (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-noahs-ark.html) and still believe the flood actually happened, is beyond help.

Seriously. Impossible.

 

What does that have to do with anything? There are far more creatures in the sea than on the land. Also note that we find fossils of aquatic creatures on mountains.

At the poles the earth's temperature is cold and it freezes water.

Seeing as all living things on the land (note, not in the sea) died...

Seeds on the other hand survived to grow when things settled down. So there would be no trees that survived the flood to be affected in a way we could tell.

Because there were no ice caps before the flood. It would take several hundred years for all the icecaps to melt if the earth rose a few degrees. What makes you think it would take a lot longer for them to form? As someone else pointed out, all that water gushing out would be hot. Hot water tends to melt ice.

Seriously, that's the dumbest list of objections I've ever seen.

It all a bunch of uneducated assumptions about what should happen based on nothing at all. Like I said before, people who reject the flood just can't wrap their closed little minds around the fact that the flood caused the earth to be a far different place than before the flood. Before the flood, people lived hundreds of years. Afterwards, they started living less than 100 and continue to do so to this day.

That would indicate a huge shift in climate. I wonder how humid the earth was before all that moisture was injected into the atmosphere.

http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/askasci/wea00/wea00241.htm

In actuality, there may be far less moisture in the air now. The rainbow was a new thing after the flood. That would indicate that it didn't rain prior to the flood. If there was no rain then there would need to be a lot of moisture in the air.

That may have been what it meant when it talks about the windows of the heavens opening up. It may actually be far less humid today.

 

Oh brother.

Try clicking the link you ....
*beyond flabbergasted*

 

I seriously cannot believe your mentality. I provide a well referenced resource full of highly documented pieces of evidence against the flood. They are all well understood principles and every single one of them disagrees with the flood, and you don't bother looking at the resource, instead you claim I have provided 'dumb' reason which are uneducated.

It is un-f'n-believable. Like seriously. I am truely blown away here in my own seat.

You dismiss Ice Core Samples which go back around 150,000 years as if I made it up. No. It isn't made up, it is based upon 4 independent methods of ageing, all 4 of which have been scrutinised scientifically.

As opposed to you "Well the book says...blah....so, therefore you are uneducated".

Far out. I've never seen such superiority in ignorance before.

read the damn article before you respond this time: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-noahs-ark.html

 

An actual yextract from the article this time (since posting the headings wasn't clear enough that people should read the article itself)

Why is there no mention of the Flood in the records of Egyptian or Mesopotamian civilizations which existed at the time? Biblical dates (I Kings 6:1, Gal 3:17, various generation lengths given in Genesis) place the Flood 1300 years before Solomon began the first temple. We can construct reliable chronologies for near Eastern history, particularly for Egypt, from many kinds of records from the literate cultures in the near East. These records are independent of, but supported by, dating methods such as dendrochronology and carbon-14. The building of the first temple can be dated to 950 B.C. +/- some small delta, placing the Flood around 2250 B.C. Unfortunately, the Egyptians (among others) have written records dating well back before 2250 B.C. (the Great Pyramid, for example dates to the 26th century B.C., 300 years before the Biblical date for the Flood). No sign in Egyptian inscriptions of this global flood around 2250 B.C.

How did the human population rebound so fast? Genealogies in Genesis put the Tower of Babel about 110 to 150 years after the Flood [Gen 10:25, 11:10-19]. How did the world population regrow so fast to make its construction (and the city around it) possible? Similarly, there would have been very few people around to build Stonehenge and the Pyramids, rebuild the Sumerian and Indus Valley civilizations, populate the Americas, etc.

 

Did you observe the ice forming for 150,000 years? You didn't make it up. You just assume that all the assumptions that scientists make are accurate assumptions. Ice melts and reforms. Dating ice is like dating sand on a beach.

And the date of the flood is known how? Geneologies in the Bible can (and do) skip generations.

When a mommy and a daddy love each other...

Let's see, we have 8 people, 4 families. Each of them can have dozens of children each who can have who knows how many kids each...

Or did you assume that they'd just have 1 or 2 kids like most families today?

I know. Shocking when you realize how many assumptions it takes for you to "prove" anything.

 

Forget it. You're a fool.

Decades of meticulous research fobbed off as 'assumption' because you think a few sentences in a book of questionable origin is more reliable.

How stupid of me, to actually trust the word of people who have time and time again demonstrated the truth of their methodology and their honest, because a book which has brought more warfare and division to our world than any other work on earth disagrees with the evidence.

Wake up.