Noah's Ark 2004

Just want to pop in here while I have the links on the clipboard...


Im a little bit concerned when Critics OR Christians believe they have read 'facts' when they only read someones uninformed opinion or speculation.

A good example are 'Skeptic' sites which 'sound' like they are scientifically backed when in actuality are simply 'saying things' they 'feel like'.

Many 'articles' will simply state (as if some understood research) that there is no way to account for all the water needed to flood the earth.

A reader wanting to believe them will often be convinced he 'now knows' this is an established principle without questioning 'WHY' the skeptic has stated this.

Christians are too often guilty of this too.
"They HAVE found Noah's Ark..."
Not realising that this is an opinion you read - NOT an actual fact. Even if it was presented, as if, it was 'decided'.

Two responsible links explaining why the entire Earth was flooded.
[If I can add something - we can all look at maps and see the earth has divided apart from itself]

Anyway. Where did this water come from:
http://www.christiananswers.net/q-aig/aig-c010.html
Where did it go?
http://www.christiananswers.net/q-aig/aig-floodwater.html

Critics now have to admit there was .. at a minimum .. a massive flood in, at least, the Black Sea region centuries ago.
What is 'Sheer Balls' is that they are actually trying to 'turn this around' for their own argument.
LMAO!
Sorta like "Ya .. ok.. Ok we will 'Give you' that a small cataclysmic flood did happen yes... but we demand you drop the bigger charges"

But seriously.. here is a link on that:
http://www.christiananswers.net/q-crs/crs-blacksea.html

Since no one is going to build an life-sized version of the Ark (and we dont know precisely its shape or specific details anyway)
we have to do our best at re-creating it on paper (or in scale versions)

here is a comprehensive study (Somewhat complicated for those of us not handy with 'mathy stuff')
http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/Magazines/tj/docs/v8n1_ArkSafety.asp
[some critics think it left out 'Forward Velocity' for what that is worth]

Just for fun - there is certainly a very good explanation for how 'all the animals' got on the Ark.
http://www.christiananswers.net/q-eden/edn-c013.html

 

This is absolutely NOT significant when claiming that a worldwide flood never happened! The Black Sea is what, like 2% of the area of the Earth's surface?

The way that the Black Sea flood relates to Noah's flood, is that the Black Sea flood is a perfect model for what spurred the mythological creation of Noah's flood.

Im sure you know that the Black Sea flood is very well understood by science.

So you are just incapable then, of seeing the difference between a flood the size of a lake and a flood that completely covers the continents of Earth?

 

I think 'very good explanation' is a bit of an overstatement. First the article states there are 1 Million species and begins to break this down. There are about 1.8 Million NAMED species and scientist assume that there are between 5 and 20 million TOTAL species on earth. Most of which, obviously, await discovery. Now, of course you have to remove all sea dwelling creatures, which do accoutn for a lot of them, but there are still over 700,000 NAMED animals which need to be captured in pairs. That's 1.4 million animals in an ark the size of your average Super Wal Mart store. If he could find and capture a pair of animals every hour (without any cars, planes or engines to move him around) and he collected 24 hours a day it would only take 160 years to get them all collected. Now how he got to Australia and South and North America to capture all the animals found ONLY Here is another question altogether.

The article you link to says that Noah could have captured as few as 2000 animals (or 1000 species) there are over 3,500 species of land mammals alone - thats 7000 animals right there. Where they get their bogus info is quite beyond my imagination. Then of course he had to feed and water them... which your article just says they wen't 'dormant'. Ummmm.. OK. But even when animals go dormant (which very few do, and CERTAINLY not for 371 days) they consume tremendous amounts of food before they hibernate - which is generally only for a couple of months.

This story, interpretted word for word is just completely infeesible. Did a flood happen in the middle east around the time indicated in the bible? It sure as hell could of. Great floods are recorded throughout history... Did a man build an ark and then manage to trap EVERY species on earth with primative technologies, no real scientific classification system, and no motorized trasit? I seriously question your intelligence if you buy it. Even the Croc Hunter in all his glory could do no such thing.

PS: I love how your link suggests Dinosaur fossils are the evidence of the flood. Dinosaurs walked the earth 248 TO 65 million YEARS AGO... when was that flood?

 

Just like you are doing with your links right now?

This link presents 2 theories for where the water came from.

1. It came from the Earth's crust through volcanic activity.
2. It came from a vapor canopy.

The link itself says that number 2 is no longer thought of as a significant source of flood waters.

So that leaves number 1 which, incidently, I previously mentioned.

"If water [enough to flood the continents] was pumped out from inside earth's crust, it would carry with it noxious sulfur rich gases that would leave creatures unable to breathe."

This link claims- The catastrophic plate tectonics model gives a mechanism for the deepening of the oceans and the rising of mountains at the end of the flood.

Anybody who knows anything about plate tectonics knows that this claim is complete foolishness.

Tectonic plates move mere inches a year, and this link is claiming they moved hundreds or thousands of feet at the end of a 40 day flood.

Even though it is impossible, if tectonics plates moved as much as they say at the end of this flood, earthquakes would abound across the entire surface of the Earth. The tidal waves created by this would be unfathomably large. The sea would swallow Noah's ark in an instant.

More information on how it is impossible that tectonic plates ever moved that fast is available upon request.

Why can't you see the difference between a lake flood and a world flood?

Explain to me, Brock, how the Black Sea flood relates to the authenticity of Noah's flood.

 

So we all agree that the evidence is overwhelming that a massive flood overtook the Black Sea region. (actually what we think is that the Black Sea was the source) The Flood in question is NOT 'The Black Sea' 'flooding over' but rather a massive deluge over a good size peice of the Earth!

Now I notice we are also being forced (by overwhelming research) to agree that most regions of the Earth have been under water at some point.

I think we can stop debating whether or not the planet has ever been flooded.

The disagreement is now about 'How'.

Was it thousands of massive (yet localised) floods - 0r - did it happen during one cataclysmic year?

Did it happen 700 trillion years ago (or much more recently as some theorise, , say two million?)
Or did these happen 5,000 years ago?
(coinciding with the beginning of known human history)

For the guy wondering why Dinosaurs are included as 'evidence' of a world-wide flood:
Its because Dinosaurs (and not limited to) are found fossilised in sediment all over the world.
As to Dinosaurs living 20 million years ago - that is your guesstimate, not mine.

 

it seems this has gone around in teh cilces, for teh good half hour ive been reading thsi thread.

brock's main problems in his arguements is this (though he has been putting up a butter show than that other guy who pretended to be a 'non-bleiver himself showing all teh rpoof and ending up making himself look like an idiot and having no replies)

brock is trying to claim that certain events such as evolution and tectonic movement can all be done over a short amount of time. evolution really is misunderstood by probably over 90% of teh worlds population. evolution is an incredibly alrge scale thing and tehre are many levels of it.

there is low level evolution, such as colour, senses, fur lenght, body size, etc. these things can change very quickly. however waht cant change quickly is body structure. although they may look similar, the physical structure of a sabretooth tiger is incredibly different to that of, say, a persian cat. that sort of evolution takes much more than a few generations. that sort of evolution takes much more than 10 000 years or however long beleievers think teh world as we know it has been around. the cats are jsut a small one though, look at more distinctive species like reptiles, which vary even greater. this is still keping to lower level evolution than most of teh evolution that has created our world.

but if those issues are brought up thenw e can discuss them more tehre are more thigns to come indeed.

insects. they have alrgely been neglected. insects are a very different case for these arguements for lots of insects like ants, there are not males and females, there are very complex social orders that cannot surive wihtout precise environments.
tehre are so many types on insects its almsot unbelievable. most insects also dont live for 40 days so they dhave to be breeding and stuff on the boat.

oh yer you said noah would have supplies, but over 40 days, an ark's worth of animals would eat more than an arc's worht of food so youd need to review all your calculations.

some insects would have been on animals, but thats negligable in the whole scheme of it all.

anyway ive made a few points on evolution im rather restless and hungry atm so ill keep going and other topics can be adressed when they come.

tectonic movment, as was mentioned, cannot occur over a short period of time. the earth was one thing, millions and millions of years ago. IF the flood theory was based back then, it would have a HELL of a lot more evidence supporting it, but christians beleve less than a nhundred thuosand years even is enough.
the earth moves anc changes shape all teh tiem but its very slow. so slow most people cant comprehend it. its such a long and drawn out process that it cannot happen quickly. as said, earthquakes would occur. waves.

do they teach this stuff at school in america? tectonic movement largely requires the slow moving apart of plates, which then buckle of overlap eachother oat one end, but they cant keep going unless they get filled in behind by molten rock. if tectonic plates moved as fast as you can claim, then there would not be a normal earth as we know it, tehre would be huge sectiosn of very plain, very new rock over the centere of waht was poriginally the massive continent. this is no there. there is a very slow, and very old patturn showing of incredibly slow movement. the age of rock and the movement is all recorded in relation to the rock aorund it and tehre is more scientific evidence that the world is fuckin old than fuckin new.

the volcanic rock on top of the mountain is EASILY explained. the mountain was under water once, yes, tectonic movement allows rock from even below our current seabed to move up to a high of a mountian. thats why tehres fossils at certain highs on different mountains. scientists, in many cases not all, have found that the age of teh rock will contain similar samples to otehr ages, even thuogh their height varies greatly. in some cases, there indeed were seas atmountian level. millions of years ago, land levels may have been higher or lower, depending on the pressure of the magma beneath certain areas, and the rest of hte world. parts of australia were once submerged. but also, parts of australia were once very low, and moved up high, with a different situation to simply having a high water level.

oh and when teh flood water was coming down, why did noahs boat not get affected by the torrential rain, as was pointed out, would be incredibly feirce? waht about all the other thuosands of boats?

im sorta rushing i think i hope you can undestand waht im saying

anyway umm as i said before im restless and hungry and im sorta loosing track of waht im saying caus ive come into teh discussion so late.

but a question is: why dont christians have enough faith in their god to jsut assume he used his almighty powers to answer any of the unanswered questions? god was and is apparently , all-powerful. an omnipotent being would surely be able to create the space and resources within the arc to house the animals hed surely be able to then spread the animals around teh world jsut as he gathered them. in fact why the held he even do that? why didnt he jsut make mroe animals? after the 7 days did he loose all creation powrs? why not create a ledge above the flood that they could live on? why not leave a protion of the earth unflooded for the animals to live while teh rest of teh world was underwater. he can do it, jsut liek teh waters parted for moses.

cant he?

*evil and non-beleiverishly*
or was he jsut ahving fun killing off the world because they were meany poos and didnt worship him, and wanted to jsut give noah a little help caus his wife was hot?

 

Here is an idea, when you die, right before God judges you, you can ask Him. Perhaps He will give you an answer before sending you to hell. Anyways, I gave all the answers in a quite lenghty post. As a matter of fact, it was a few days before any other non believers figured out what to say in their reply.

 

lol talk about being full of yourself. have you thought maybe people jsut werent sitting at teh forums waiting for your reply? from waht i see, relies have been pretty consistant the whole teim trhough. maybe poeple just couldnt be bothered responding to your arrogance? hell at least when i use arrogance ill accept poeples responses. your jsut dumb who has used an old and outdated boring argument technique most popular by those who want to win quickly to avoid further discussion, which is always inevitable. for teh best argument is one that has not been rushed.

anyway god isnt allowed to send me to hell if i ask for forgiveness.

heres an idea, when you die.. oh guess waht you dont get to ask jack shit, your forgotten, as everyone is eventually, and you cant even experience or percieve your death. oh but that jsut cant be true, because you cant comprehend such nothingness and of course everyhting in your universe can be rationalised and understood by you because it was obviosuly made jsut for you to live in for a few decades jsut for fun before going somewhere else for eternity.

 

Until now, This discussion was not going in circles.
In fact, we had pretty much agreed that:
yes, the evidence is overwhelming that massive floods have occured in several if not all regions of the Earth.

We have not agreed if this happened during one year (largely) or over milleniums.

This is a tremendous difference from just 30 years ago when it was one side denying any floods happened vs. a worldwide one.

I would not 'rub it in the face' of Genesis Critics [that they have been forced to concede and in some cases admit they were wrong] if it were not for the fact they have tried to 'Plea Bargain' and 'rub that in the face' of us Pro-Genesis people!

Another example would be the Rocky Mountain Seashells.
20 years ago anti-Genesis people taunted Genesis believers to 'Prove it!"

Genesis folks climbed high to the peaks of the Rocky Mountains and found Seashells and fossilised marine life everywhere.
Then.
The Critics had to 'think fast' and proceeded to teach (cover-up better word) that .. oh..."Yes.. Um... these were 'lake beds' and then the Mountains Grew afterwards with the shells still sitting on the face of them.
But...
Somewhere in the last 10 years they had no choice (based on landslides of logic and science) to ADMIT this was false, what they taught as 'Fact' to an entire generation of kids was WRONG.

Without a 'peep' they now teach that the Mountains were virtually underwater up to the peaks.
Giant Lakes ya.

Dont worry, you didnt 'miss anything' because this dramatic and astonishing admission of failure, and admission that Creationist were the ones scientifically advanced was NEVER SPOKEN ABOUT Publicly.

They just sorta 'switched that in the textbooks' while no one was looking and pretended like "Of course we always knew that"

And now they are doing it again.. pretending like 'They are informing Creationists" about the Black Sea Region being deluged.

Even pretending they are the ones 'Explaining it"

Run Evolutionist run.. you intellectual cowards!

LOL.. Too much coffee in Old Brocktoon this morn, folks hehe

 

Please don't be dishonest Brock. Evolutionary geologists have been associating ice ages with floods as long as ice ages have been known about, since the 1800's.

Brock, sea shells and other marine life have been around for well over 500,000,000 years.
The Rocky Mountains had hundreds of millions of years to form after these sea shells were fossilized.

Remember tectonic plates?
Let's be conservative and say that the plates which created the Rockies were only moving two inches per year (4 inches combined).

500,000,000 years x 4 inches per year = 2 billion inches = over 150,000,000 feet!

Of course the highest point in the Rockies is not even above 15,000 feet.

As numbers show, it would be entirely possible that the Rocky mountains came about after fossilized sea shells.

Of course they are informing the creationists of the Black Sea flood,
Evolutionists are the ones leading the most advanced research on it.

 

We informed you that the basin was under a massive deluge.

Science then informed you this is beyond a doubt.

Now you know.

Period.

Glad to see you admit that Creationists were right about that one.

 

get abck to some of teh issues i raised at some point please brock?

 

StonerBill,

Sorry but you are not up to the discussion. Good luck next year anyhow.

I just wanted to touch on MNS's explanations for the marine life fossil and shells at the peak of the Rockies.

The Uplift theory is eliminated because erosion (an known observable phenominon) makes it impossible for any peaks to still exist after 500 Million Years.

(in fact, the rocky mountains and everything else on earth would be flat by now)

The same people now concede that the Valleys between the mountains were actually filled with water (SuperLakes)

If you can explain why erosion did not happen for millions of years - then you can go back to holding the Uplift Explanation for the Seashells and Marine Fossil at some of the highest peaks on Earth.

 

Well, first off, the Rocky Mountains are not 500 million years old. What I explained in my previous post was that the Rockies had a tremendous window of opportunity to come into existence after fossilized seashells. The Rockies are thought to have done most of their rising up in the period between 70 and 30 million years ago.

Allow me to explain.

After the Rocky mountains reached a substantial height (higher than they are today), part of western North America started to stretch, and much of the southwestern part of the high mountain plateau started to get broken up into ranges with basins in between them. This area is now called the Basin and Range Province.

Basins not only greatly elude erosion, but they gather material that erodes off of surrounding peaks. We also know that basins are prime locations for lakes, or, as you refered to them in this instance- Superlakes.

 

I agree that has been the traditional theory.


The seashells and Marine life are found at the peaks.

The latest way to 'plea bargain' has been to suggest the 'Superlakes' Rose so high that at points they flooded over the tops of the Rocky (and Cascadia) Mountains.

So, there is a point of agreement again.
Its agreed that even the highest points of North America have been flooded.

Again.. Some saying this happened 'Locally' at a different time than other massive, yet local floods.

 

you never like to give explinations for your oppinons and palming off do you?

 

I don't believe you. Show me. Offer a link.

No this is not agreed.

 

Im not talking sea shells, but I have learned they have discovered pillar lava on mount Ararat,and it has been found from the top of the mountain down. Pillar lava is formed when a volcanic vent is surmerged below water. Mt. Ararat is about 17,700 feet high.

 

Can we see a picture of these pillars? most lava pillars take longer than 40 days to form i think

 

You can google search 'Burgess Shale' as a specific one.
http://www.scienceweb.org/burgess/bintro.html

There are a number of others too but I cant recall the specific names sorry.

That particular site has not been corrected to fit with the new 'SuperLake' means of explaining the marine fossils.
(They are still touting the former seabed theory .. now apparently discarded.
You will have to ask Evolutionists exactly why but i suspect its the highly embarrassing 'Erosion Oversight')

Yes, You and Evolutionists now agree that there were 'SuperLakes' [meaning water right?] and those Superlakes of water which completely submerged the 'Basins' of NorthWest North American had (at some point) risen to the Peaks of the Mountains.