TheRaider.net
 

Go Back   The Raven > Off Topic > Archaeology
User Name
Password

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 08-18-2006, 06:24 AM   #26
smokin_si1138
IndyFan
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Essex, England
Posts: 17
Clinton,

I totally agree with you!

Doc Savage,

I'm not sure where you get your info from, let me assure you... 99% of archaeologists still scoff at the idea of the Exodus.

You try and bring "Biblical" archaeology into any serious univeristy course and you will be laughed out. There has been some amazing attempts to crowbar the Biblical accounts into history all of which have failed.

As for the Gulf of Aqaba... I presume you are referring to Ron Wyatt and his amazing chariot wheel hub... hmmmm... again that's not evidence... it was a case of Wyatt interpreting what he saw as what he wanted. He found a chariot hub so it had to be from the Biblical account of the parting of teh red sea.

I mean there is no other explanation for a chariot wheel being on the bottom of a sea now is there? No no. This is a common occurance in the world of Biblical archaeology. Flimsy evidence = proof positive.

Ron Wyatt wasn't even an archaeologist! And more "wheels" have been found by who? Amateurs. Usually just divers. These wheels are more than likely just coral formations. Hell, the wheel hub he found has mysteriously vanished.

The possible mention of the Hebrew tribe within the Amarna letters is still a subject of great debate. And frankly even if the references are to the Hebrew's this doesn't mean that the Bible's accounts are historical.

And how on earth does one scientists claims that the Gospel of Luke was accurate (and remember he was working from the archaeological evidence of 100 years ago, when archaeology was in its infancy!) change anything?

Biblical archaeologists (and I've met a few) are almost fanatical. They crowbar their faith into known history and make the most incredible conclusions from the flimsiest evidence. They are a laughing stock amongst serious archaeologists, and frankly in most cases they deserve to be. I have NO respect for anyone who tries to warp history and prehistory to fit in with their own ideology.
smokin_si1138 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-18-2006, 07:05 AM   #27
qwerty
IndyFan
 
qwerty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Serbia
Posts: 631
Quote:
Originally Posted by smokin_si1138
Clinton,

I totally agree with you!
Listen kidd. You are new around here so I should warn you.
Never say that to guys like clinton.
You will just fire them up, and then we will all be sorry.

Last edited by qwerty : 08-18-2006 at 07:06 AM. Reason: I just noticed that that you signed in in october 2003
qwerty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-18-2006, 07:59 AM   #28
smokin_si1138
IndyFan
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Essex, England
Posts: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by qwerty
Listen kidd. You are new around here so I should warn you.
Never say that to guys like clinton.
You will just fire them up, and then we will all be sorry.

Haha... I may be new around here, but I'm a trained archaeologist. And I find it very frustrating when people imply that "crackpot" theories are widely accepted amongst the archaeological community. They're not.

Clinton was bang on in what he said. So I told him so. Huzzah!

Sheesh... Oct 2003? That long ago? Blimey... I think I only did one post back then!

One last thing... I'm not in any way attacking Doc Savage as a person... I'm engaging in a debate about theories here. I hope no one gets the wrong idea!

Last edited by smokin_si1138 : 08-18-2006 at 08:15 AM.
smokin_si1138 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-18-2006, 08:30 AM   #29
Doc Savage
IndyFan
 
Doc Savage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The 86th Floor...
Posts: 747
Quote:
Originally Posted by smokin_si1138
Haha... I may be new around here, but I'm a trained archaeologist.

That explains the bias. And just for the record, archaeology is still in its infancy. So your "trained" expertise means little to me. Tennesse R, a dear friend of mine on these boards, has just as much field time as any "trained" archaeologist, if not more.

Two people look at one discovery. Observer A relates it to the Bible, while Observer B relates it to his textbook (which, coincidentally, is contradicted in subsequent years as more "experts" decide what happened). Theories change weekly while the Bible stays the same.

But I'm the crackpot.

"There has been some amazing attempts to crowbar the Biblical accounts into history all of which have failed. " That's very broad statement. Name some.

"As for the Gulf of Aqaba... I presume you are referring to Ron Wyatt and his amazing chariot wheel hub... hmmmm... again that's not evidence... it was a case of Wyatt interpreting what he saw as what he wanted." As is the case with all archaeology. Bottom line, as with Creation vs. evolution, we weren't there. The facts do fit the Biblical account when you consider the trade route along Pi-Hahiroth and the land bridge between its terminal peninsula and the shores of Arabia.

"The possible mention of the Hebrew tribe within the Amarna letters is still a subject of great debate. And frankly even if the references are to the Hebrew's this doesn't mean that the Bible's accounts are historical." Everything in archaeology is hotly debated. And the references don't imply that he Biblical accounts aren't accurate, either.

Take the city of Jericho. William Albright finds it and says "These walls fell flat." Another scientist (a lady, I believe, who's name escapes me) looks at the same evidence and says, "It didn't happen that way." Archaeology is study and inference. Facts are data open to interpretation.

But I'm the crackpot.
Doc Savage is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2006, 02:39 AM   #30
Tennessee R
IndyFan
 
Tennessee R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 1,008
Quote:
Originally Posted by smokin_si1138
As for the Gulf of Aqaba... I presume you are referring to Ron Wyatt and his amazing chariot wheel hub... hmmmm... again that's not evidence... it was a case of Wyatt interpreting what he saw as what he wanted. He found a chariot hub so it had to be from the Biblical account of the parting of teh red sea.

What Ron Wyatt found was 8 spoked. The only dynasty to ever use 8-spoked chariot wheels was 18th Dynasty. This puts us into a realistic time frame.

Quote:
Originally Posted by smokin_si1138
Ron Wyatt wasn't even an archaeologist!


You mean he didn't have a degree in archaeology, don't you?

Quote:
Originally Posted by smokin_si1138
And more "wheels" have been found by who? Amateurs. Usually just divers. These wheels are more than likely just coral formations.


This theory is incredibly true, and was actually stated by Ron.

Quote:
Originally Posted by smokin_si1138
Hell, the wheel hub he found has mysteriously vanished.

Not true. it was handed over to the Director of Antiquities in Cairo. Now whether it was sealed in a box, and carted to the basement, never to be seen again, or if it is in the museum at cairo, I (personally) don't know. I can try to find out. But if I find that it actually is on display in the museum, would it change your opinion?
Tennessee R is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2006, 11:59 AM   #31
ClintonHammond
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Windsor Ontario Canada
Posts: 3,237
"Ron Wyatt is neither an archaeologist nor has he ever carried out a legally licensed excavation.. [His claims] fall into the category of trash which one finds in tabloids such as the National Enquirer, Sun etc."
-Joe Zias
-Curator of Anthropology/Archaeology
-Israel Antiquities Authority

"while the Bible stays the same.
But I'm the crackpot"

Do you still believe the world is flat? Or that the universe revolves around our planet? Or that it's o.k. to beat your wife and sell your children into slavery? These are just a few of the things we also thought we 'knew' 2 or 3 or 4 thousand years ago when the bible was being written.... So yes.... The Bible stays the same... to its detriment.
ClintonHammond is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2006, 08:20 AM   #32
Doc Savage
IndyFan
 
Doc Savage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The 86th Floor...
Posts: 747
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClintonHammond
Do you still believe the world is flat? Or that the universe revolves around our planet? Or that it's o.k. to beat your wife and sell your children into slavery? These are just a few of the things we also thought we 'knew' 2 or 3 or 4 thousand years ago when the bible was being written.... So yes.... The Bible stays the same... to its detriment.
The Bible:
a) never states the world is flat
b) never states the universe is geocentric
c) never condones beating wives or selling children into slavery (just because some did doesn't mean God condones it)
...so what were we talking about?
Doc Savage is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2006, 09:13 AM   #33
ClintonHammond
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Windsor Ontario Canada
Posts: 3,237
Genesis 19:8: The men of Sodom gathered around Lot's house, and asked that he bring his two guests out so that the men can "know" them. This is frequently interpreted as a desire to gang rape the visitors, although other interpretations are possible. Lot offers his two virgin daughters to be raped instead: He is recorded as saying: "I have two daughters which have not known man; let me, I pray you, bring them out unto you, and do ye to them as is good in your eyes." Yet, even after this despicable act, Lot is still regarded as an honorable man, worth saving from the destruction of the city. Allowing one's daughters to be sexually assaulted by multiple rapists appears to be treated as a minor transgression, because of the low status of the young women.

MoreChild abuse

Proverbs 23
23:13 Withhold not correction from the child: for if thou beatest him with the rod, he shall not die.
23:14 Thou shalt beat him with the rod, and shalt deliver his soul from hell.
Beat your children hard and often. Don't worry about hurting them. You may break a few bones and cause some brain damage, but it isn't going to kill them. And even if it does, they'll be better off for it. They'll thank you in heaven for beating the hell out of them.

How to sell your daughter
Exodus 21:7 And if a man sell his daughter to be a maidservant, she shall not go out as the menservants do. How to sell your daughter -- and what to do if she fails to please her new master.
"Exodus 21:7 says it's OK to sell your daughter into slavery. Not even in Nevada." -- Penn & Teller on the Bible
21:8 If she please not her master, who hath betrothed her to himself, then shall he let her be redeemed: to sell her unto a strange nation he shall have no power, seeing he hath dealt deceitfully with her.

Capitol Punishment For Animals AND People....
21:28 If an ox gore a man or a woman, that they die: then the ox shall be surely stoned, and his flesh shall not be eaten; but the owner of the ox shall be quit.
If an ox gores someone, "then the ox shall surely be stoned."
21:29 But if the ox were wont to push with his horn in time past, and it hath been testified to his owner, and he hath not kept him in, but that he hath killed a man or a woman; the ox shall be stoned, and his owner also shall be put to death. (21:29, 32)
"The ox shall be stoned, and his owner shall be put to death."
If an ox gores someone due to the negligence of its owner, kill its owner and stone to death the ox.".

God's rules for disposing of hated wives.
If any man take a wife, and go in unto her, and hate her, And give occasions of speech against her, and bring up an evil name upon her, and say, I took this woman, and when I came to her, I found her not a maid: Then shall the father of the damsel, and her mother, take and bring forth the tokens of the damsel's virginity unto the elders of the city in the gate.... But if this thing be true, and the tokens of virginity be not found for the damsel: Then they shall bring out the damsel to the door of her father's house, and the men of her city shall stone her with stones that she die: because she hath wrought folly in Israel, to play the whore in her father's house: so shalt thou put evil away from among you. -- Deuteronomy 22:13

Leviticus 18:19 Also thou shalt not approach unto a woman to uncover her nakedness, as long as she is put apart for her uncleanness. "Also thou shalt not approach unto a woman to uncover her nakedness, as long as she is apart for her uncleanness." (Don't even look at a menstruating woman.)

Numbers 3:15 Number the children of Levi after the house of their fathers, by their families: every male from a month old and upward shalt thou number them. (3:15-16) When "Moses numbered them according to the word of the Lord" he was told to count "every male from a month old and upward." Women and girls didn't count as persons. Neither did babies (or fetuses) under 1 month old. (So much for no abortions eh....)

Deuteronomy 28:56 The tender and delicate woman among you, which would not adventure to set the sole of her foot upon the ground for delicateness and tenderness, her eye shall be evil toward the husband of her bosom, and toward her son, and toward her daughter,
28:57 And toward her young one that cometh out from between her feet, and toward her children which she shall bear: for she shall eat them
"The tender and delicate woman" will be forced to eat her own children "that cometh out from between her feet."


Science and History
1:31 And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.

In Genesis 1 the entire creation takes 6 days, but the universe is about 13.7 billion years old, with new stars constantly being formed.

Leviticus 11,
5-6... GOd thinks that hares and coneys chew the cud......
13-19... God thinks bats are birds.......

Numbers 21:8 And the LORD said unto Moses, Make thee a fiery serpent, and set it upon a pole: and it shall come to pass, that every one that is bitten, when he looketh upon it, shall live.
So a graven image is a cure for snake bite????

Judges 5:31 So let all thine enemies perish, O LORD: but let them that love him be as the sun when he goeth forth in his might. And the land had rest forty years.
Apparently, the sun goes around The Earth....

1 Chronicles 16:30 Fear before him, all the earth: the world also shall be stable, that it be not moved.
The Earth doesn't spin on its axis or travel about the sun??

And I'll stop there because the hatred, the lies, the wilfull ignorance in this revolting little book makes me nausious.....
ClintonHammond is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2006, 10:53 AM   #34
Doc Savage
IndyFan
 
Doc Savage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The 86th Floor...
Posts: 747
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClintonHammond
Genesis 19:8
It never says Lot's actions were directed, or approved, by God.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClintonHammond
Proverbs 23
23:13 Withhold not correction from the child: for if thou beatest him with the rod, he shall not die.
23:14 Thou shalt beat him with the rod, and shalt deliver his soul from hell.
There's a world of difference between spanking and beating.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClintonHammond
Exodus 21:7 And if a man sell his daughter to be a maidservant, she shall not go out as the menservants do.
8 If she please not her master, who hath betrothed her to himself, then shall he let her be redeemed: to sell her unto a strange nation he shall have no power, seeing he hath dealt deceitfully with her.
There's also a world of difference between a maid and a slave.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClintonHammond
"Exodus 21:7 says it's OK to sell your daughter into slavery. Not even in Nevada." -- Penn & Teller on the Bible
Not exactly Bible scholars.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClintonHammond
Capitol Punishment For Animals AND People....
21:28 If an ox gore a man or a woman, that they die: then the ox shall be surely stoned, and his flesh shall not be eaten; but the owner of the ox shall be quit.
29 But if the ox were wont to push with his horn in time past, and it hath been testified to his owner, and he hath not kept him in, but that he hath killed a man or a woman; the ox shall be stoned, and his owner also shall be put to death. (21:29, 32)
Extreme, I admit. But if I had a child killed by an animal with a record of killing and the owner had refused to address it...
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClintonHammond
If any man take a wife, and go in unto her, and hate her, And give occasions of speech against her, and bring up an evil name upon her, and say, I took this woman, and when I came to her, I found her not a maid: Then shall the father of the damsel, and her mother, take and bring forth the tokens of the damsel's virginity unto the elders of the city in the gate.... But if this thing be true, and the tokens of virginity be not found for the damsel: Then they shall bring out the damsel to the door of her father's house, and the men of her city shall stone her with stones that she die: because she hath wrought folly in Israel, to play the whore in her father's house: so shalt thou put evil away from among you. -- Deuteronomy 22:13
I'll address this in a minute.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClintonHammond
Leviticus 18:19 Also thou shalt not approach unto a woman to uncover her nakedness, as long as she is put apart for her uncleanness.
A substantial part of Levitical law were hygenic in nature, far superior to the country they's been brought out of. Most of Egypt's medicinal "remedies" called for the use of various types of dung.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClintonHammond
Neither did babies (or fetuses) under 1 month old. (So much for no abortions eh....)
I won't even justify that remark by calling it an extreme leap of faulty logic.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClintonHammond
Deuteronomy 28:56 The tender and delicate woman among you, which would not adventure to set the sole of her foot upon the ground for delicateness and tenderness, her eye shall be evil toward the husband of her bosom, and toward her son, and toward her daughter,
28:57 And toward her young one that cometh out from between her feet, and toward her children which she shall bear: for she shall eat them
Read in context, this is what would happen were Israel to be taken captive by a "nation of fierce countenance." God's Law was meant to keep them out of the curse placed on a fallen earth.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClintonHammond
In Genesis 1 the entire creation takes 6 days, but the universe is about 13.7 billion years old, with new stars constantly being formed.
No one's seen a star 'born,' they've just seen spots getting brighter as surrounding dust or gas cleared.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ClintonHammond
Leviticus 11,
5-6... GOd thinks that hares and coneys chew the cud......
13-19... God thinks bats are birds.......
The word translated 'fowls' in the KJV is the Hebrew word 'owph, which literally means 'that flies' or 'flyer.'

Quote:
Originally Posted by ClintonHammond
Numbers 21:8 And the LORD said unto Moses, Make thee a fiery serpent, and set it upon a pole: and it shall come to pass, that every one that is bitten, when he looketh upon it, shall live.
So a graven image is a cure for snake bite????
A typology of Christ on the cross (John 3:14)
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClintonHammond
Judges 5:31 So let all thine enemies perish, O LORD: but let them that love him be as the sun when he goeth forth in his might. And the land had rest forty years.
Apparently, the sun goes around The Earth....
Deborah and Barak sang that song, not God.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClintonHammond
1 Chronicles 16:30 Fear before him, all the earth: the world also shall be stable, that it be not moved.
The Earth doesn't spin on its axis or travel about the sun??
Also read "the land shall be stable, that it be not overthrown."
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClintonHammond
And I'll stop there because the hatred, the lies, the wilfull ignorance in this revolting little book makes me nausious.....
Then you haven't been reading it correctly.
Doc Savage is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2006, 11:25 AM   #35
Doc Savage
IndyFan
 
Doc Savage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The 86th Floor...
Posts: 747
Now, to address the harshness of the Law...

God exists in an eternal state of perfection. Man was made in the express image of God, sinless and eternal. (Genesis 1:26,27) He was also made a free moral agent, not a witless automaton. Mankind's progenitors chose...poorly. They picked the advice of a fallen being (satan) over the Eternal Word of God, and in doing so brought the curse upon themselves. God is life. Sin separates from God. Sin, therefore, works death in the subject.

Enter God's Law: a precursor to the redemption of man. If you're wandering through a mine field and I've written you a letter expressly stating how to avoid the mines, you have a choice. You can either take my advice or not. I wrote the letter because I care deeply for you and would rather keep you in one peice. I wrote it because I know where the mines are, whether their location and decorum makes sense to you or not.

The Law shows us the absolute character of God: righteous, just, and beyond reproach. He wouldn't tell us to act contrary to His own Nature. It also shows how far man has fallen from his original position of God-likeness.

Enter the Lamb: One born w/o the fallen nature. One Who could walk out, by nature, the Law of God. One Who would then, by means of vicarious punishment, give us credit for that blameless walk.

Was the Law harsh? When viewed from our side. In actuality, it was a look at what man was supposed to be. But it all points to the mercy and love of God in the fact that, though we couldn't fulfill it, He did it for us.
Doc Savage is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2006, 11:32 AM   #36
ClintonHammond
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Windsor Ontario Canada
Posts: 3,237
"Then you haven't been reading it correctly."
What an incredibly arrogant and ignorant thing to say, as if one persons interpretation of any given mythology is more valid than any others.... As if you could somehow experience the exact same thing someone else experiences..... Or indeed that any one myth is more factual than another....

"I'll address this in a minute"
Like you were going to address the holes in your so-called Flood Myth? Or find sources to support your claim that Java Man was a hoax? Or.... or.... or....

Maybe, save your energy....

I still maintain Doc, that you and I are both atheists.... only I believe in one less 'god' than you do
ClintonHammond is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2006, 11:38 AM   #37
Doc Savage
IndyFan
 
Doc Savage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The 86th Floor...
Posts: 747
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClintonHammond
"Then you haven't been reading it correctly."
What an incredibly arrogant and ignorant thing to say, as if one persons interpretation of any given mythology is more valid than any others.... As if you could somehow experience the exact same thing someone else experiences..... Or indeed that any one myth is more factual than another....
Or that you could interpret what billions other than myself see as the greatest love letter ever written to be filled with hate. My claim is no more objectively ignorant or arrogant than yours.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClintonHammond
"I'll address this in a minute"
Like you were going to address the holes in your so-called Flood Myth? Or find sources to support your claim that Java Man was a hoax? Or.... or.... or....
You've yet to solidly refute anything I've said. All the evidence is still open to interpretation. Just to throw one in, why are there no erosion marks between the "millenia-old" layers?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClintonHammond
I still maintain Doc, that you and I are both atheists.... only I believe in one less 'god' than you do
LOL.
Doc Savage is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2006, 12:13 PM   #38
ClintonHammond
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Windsor Ontario Canada
Posts: 3,237
"You've yet to solidly refute anything I've said"

Then you haven't been reading correctly....
ClintonHammond is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2006, 12:15 PM   #39
Doc Savage
IndyFan
 
Doc Savage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The 86th Floor...
Posts: 747
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClintonHammond
"You've yet to solidly refute anything I've said"

Then you haven't been reading correctly....
LOL...this is the stuff that gets me out of bed sometimes.
Doc Savage is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2006, 02:52 PM   #40
fortuneandglory
IndyFan
 
fortuneandglory's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Marshall College
Posts: 200
I see we have some "faithful" atheists (excuse the Oxymoron)...

You need to look at the bible as the past. Schools used paddles to "beat" children all the time, and still do in some cases. Biblical beatings were less than a fraternity hazing as far as *you* know. Things were different in the past, and *that* is what you *must* remember.
In other news...

The great biblical flood did probably happen.

The fact that the mesopotamian story of the flood is before the bibles account is because the bible was not being written by Noah himself. The accounts written in the bible are all secondhand (excuse the generalazation) except for the Gospels themselves. The fact that other cultures have a flood legend is fuel for a Christians fire.

I am disgusted at how Clinton has turned this thread into his own personal anti-religion rant. "Preach" your doctrine of indecision and hate somewhere else. Your hatred, lies, and willful ignorance in this post are revolting and make me nauseous.

If you dont believe the circumstantial evidence involving multiple legends... then believe the geological evidence. Around the same time in the Geologic Timeline that the Bible says there was a flood, beneath all the rock and stone, there is a layer of immense mud and other things condusive to a gigantic worldwide deluge. The reason that this supports the theory of a worldwide flood is because this gigantic layer is all over the world. Every continent has this layer.

As to another comment I saw on capitol punishment for animals... think about it for a second. When a pit bull starts ripping a kids arm off, what do you do with it? I'll give you one guess.

Euthanasia.

The only difference is you kill the animal with drugs instead of stones.

In any case, life was harsh back in the Old Testament, and punishment was as well because your sins had to be paid for. To cleanse yourself, you had to do something in return. That's why we have Jesus. The OLD TESTAMENT is here for us as history, so we know where we came from. The New Testament is here to guide us to heaven, because when Jesus came, he destroyed conceptions of what was right and wrong, and the Jewish "Powers that be" hated him for it. He saves us from the sin and chaos that went on in the old testamen, and you would do well to remember that.

The Bible did change. And Jesus is the reason.

Quote:
Mankind's progenitors chose...poorly

Great use of quote Doc! Laughed my butt off... and I agree... but it had to be done.

As to you Clinton, every post I read of yours is ill thought out, and translated through your atheist mind. All that I have seen from you is hatred and incredible stupidity. The Atheist interprets facts to his Mindset, as does a Christian... however, Atheists ignore facts to uphold they're doctorine of indesicion. I agree that some Christians do this as well, but nothing so far has proven or disproven the Bible. The fact is, you're posts are cruel, full of hate and lies, and you are terribly concieted.

Quote:
"Then you haven't been reading it correctly."
What an incredibly arrogant and ignorant thing to say, as if one persons interpretation of any given mythology is more valid than any others.... As if you could somehow experience the exact same thing someone else experiences..... Or indeed that any one myth is more factual than another....

And you have a forked tounge it seems...

You've yet to solidly refute anything I've said"

Quote:
Then you haven't been reading correctly....

Try to remember what you say, and not repeat what you think is a mistake for others to say themselves.

Last edited by fortuneandglory : 09-05-2006 at 02:59 PM.
fortuneandglory is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2006, 03:06 PM   #41
ClintonHammond
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Windsor Ontario Canada
Posts: 3,237
"The great biblical flood did probably happen."
Only in the minds of the people who created the story... as an actual historical event, it is wildly improbable. (page 6 of The Exodus Thread... I'll repost it below)

"there is a layer of immense mud and other things condusive to a gigantic worldwide deluge"
Let's see a source for this wild assertion please.

"The fact that other cultures have a flood legend..."
Only means that floods happen in different places all over the world... just not at the same time.

"The fact is, you're posts are cruel, full of hate and lies"
My posts are nothing of the kind.... Except in that sometimes the facts can hurt those who do not wish to see them.

"you are terribly concieted(sic.)"
I assume you mean 'conceited'... Call it confident.... I provided a LONG list of 'holes' in the rational for the global flood myth... try to answer ANY of them....

"Atheists ignore facts"
I'm waiting to see your so-called facts.... and I'm waiting for you to answer mine.

Last edited by ClintonHammond : 09-05-2006 at 03:21 PM.
ClintonHammond is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2006, 03:22 PM   #42
ClintonHammond
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Windsor Ontario Canada
Posts: 3,237
Most people who believe in a global flood also believe that the flood was responsible for creating all fossil-bearing strata. (The alternative, that the strata were laid down slowly and thus represent a time sequence of several generations at least, would prove that some kind of evolutionary process occurred.) However, there is a great deal of contrary evidence.

Before you argue that fossil evidence was dated and interpreted to meet evolutionary assumptions, remember that the geological column and the relative dates therein were laid out by people who believed divine creation, before Darwin even formulated his theory. (See, for example, Moore [1973], or the closing pages of Dawson [1868].)

Why are geological eras consistent worldwide? How do you explain worldwide agreement between "apparent" geological eras and several different (independent) radiometric and nonradiometric dating methods? [e.g., Short et al, 1991]

How was the fossil record sorted in an order convenient for evolution? Ecological zonation, hydrodynamic sorting, and differential escape fail to explain:

* the extremely good sorting observed. Why didn't at least one dinosaur make it to the high ground with the elephants?
* the relative positions of plants and other non-motile life. (Yun, 1989, describes beautifully preserved algae from Late Precambrian sediments. Why don't any modern-looking plants appear that low in the geological column?)
* why some groups of organisms, such as mollusks, are found in many geologic strata.
* why organisms (such as brachiopods) which are very similar hydrodynamically (all nearly the same size, shape, and weight) are still perfectly sorted.
* why extinct animals which lived in the same niches as present animals didn't survive as well. Why did no pterodons make it to high ground?
* how coral reefs hundreds of feet thick and miles long were preserved intact with other fossils below them.
* why small organisms dominate the lower strata, whereas fluid mechanics says they would sink slower and thus end up in upper strata.
* why artifacts such as footprints and burrows are also sorted. [Crimes & Droser, 1992]
* why no human artifacts are found except in the very uppermost strata. If, at the time of the Flood, the earth was overpopulated by people with technology for shipbuilding, why were none of their tools or buildings mixed with trilobite or dinosaur fossils?
* why different parts of the same organisms are sorted together. Pollen and spores are found in association with the trunks, leaves, branches, and roots produced by the same plants [Stewart, 1983].
* why ecological information is consistent within but not between layers. Fossil pollen is one of the more important indicators of different levels of strata. Each plant has different and distinct pollen, and, by telling which plants produced the fossil pollen, it is easy to see what the climate was like in different strata. Was the pollen hydraulically sorted by the flood water so that the climatic evidence is different for each layer?

How do surface features appear far from the surface? Deep in the geologic column there are formations which could have originated only on the surface, such as:

* Rain drops. [Robb, 1992]
* River channels. [Miall, 1996, especially chpt. 6]
* Wind-blown dunes. [Kocurek & Dott, 1981; Clemmenson & Abrahamsen, 1983; Hubert & Mertz, 1984]
* Beaches.
* Glacial deposits. [Eyles & Miall, 1984]
* Burrows. [Crimes & Droser, 1992; Thackray, 1994]
* In-place trees. [Cristie & McMillan, 1991]
* Soil. [Reinhardt & Sigleo, 1989; Wright, 1986, 1994]
* Desiccation cracks. [Andrews, 1988; Robb, 1992]
* Footprints. [Gore, 1993, has a photograph (p. 16-17) showing dinosaur footprints in one layer with water ripples in layers above and below it. Gilette & Lockley, 1989, have several more examples, including dinosaur footprints on top of a coal seam (p. 361-366).]
* Meteorites and meteor craters. [Grieve, 1997; Schmitz et al, 1997]
* Coral reefs. [Wilson, 1975]
* Cave systems. [James & Choquette, 1988]

How could these have appeared in the midst of a catastrophic flood?

How does a global flood explain angular unconformities? These are where one set of layers of sediments have been extensively modified (e.g., tilted) and eroded before a second set of layers were deposited on top. They thus seem to require at least two periods of deposition (more, where there is more than one unconformity) with long periods of time in between to account for the deformation, erosion, and weathering observed.

How were mountains and valleys formed? Many very tall mountains are composed of sedimentary rocks. (The summit of Everest is composed of deep-marine limestone, with fossils of ocean-bottom dwelling crinoids [Gansser, 1964].) If these were formed during the Flood, how did they reach their present height, and when were the valleys between them eroded away? Keep in mind that many valleys were clearly carved by glacial erosion, which is a slow process.

When did granite batholiths form? Some of these are intruded into older sediments and have younger sediments on their eroded top surfaces. It takes a long time for magma to cool into granite, nor does granite erode very quickly. [For example, see Donohoe & Grantham, 1989, for locations of contact between the South Mountain Batholith and the Meugma Group of sediments, as well as some angular unconformities.]

How can a single flood be responsible for such extensively detailed layering? One formation in New Jersey is six kilometers thick. If we grant 400 days for this to settle, and ignore possible compaction since the Flood, we still have 15 meters of sediment settling per day. And yet despite this, the chemical properties of the rock are neatly layered, with great changes (e.g.) in percent carbonate occurring within a few centimeters in the vertical direction. How does such a neat sorting process occur in the violent context of a universal flood dropping 15 meters of sediment per day? How can you explain a thin layer of high carbonate sediment being deposited over an area of ten thousand square kilometers for some thirty minutes, followed by thirty minutes of low carbonate deposition, etc.? [Zimmer, 1992]

How do you explain the formation of varves? The Green River formation in Wyoming contains 20,000,000 annual layers, or varves, identical to those being laid down today in certain lakes. The sediments are so fine that each layer would have required over a month to settle.

How could a flood deposit layered fossil forests? Stratigraphic sections showing a dozen or more mature forests layered atop each other--all with upright trunks, in-place roots, and well-developed soil--appear in many locations. One example, the Joggins section along the Bay of Fundy, shows a continuous section 2750 meters thick (along a 48-km sea cliff) with multiple in-place forests, some separated by hundreds of feet of strata, some even showing evidence of forest fires. [Ferguson, 1988. For other examples, see Dawson, 1868; Cristie & McMillan, 1991; Gastaldo, 1990; Yuretich, 1994.] Creationists point to logs sinking in a lake below Mt. St. Helens as an example of how a flood can deposit vertical trunks, but deposition by flood fails to explain the roots, the soil, the layering, and other features found in such places.

Where did all the heat go? If the geologic record was deposited in a year, then the events it records must also have occurred within a year. Some of these events release significant amounts of heat.

* Magma. The geologic record includes roughly 8 x 1024 grams of lava flows and igneous intrusions. Assuming (conservatively) a specific heat of 0.15, this magma would release 5.4 x 1027 joules while cooling 1100 degrees C. In addition, the heat of crystallization as the magma solidifies would release a great deal more heat.
* Limestone formation. There are roughly 5 x 1023 grams of limestone in the earth's sediments [Poldervaart, 1955], and the formation of calcite releases about 11,290 joules/gram [Weast, 1974, p. D63]. If only 10% of the limestone were formed during the Flood, the 5.6 x 1026 joules of heat released would be enough to boil the flood waters.
* Meteorite impacts. Erosion and crustal movements have erased an unknown number of impact craters on earth, but Creationists Whitcomb and DeYoung suggest that cratering to the extent seen on the Moon and Mercury occurred on earth during the year of Noah's Flood. The heat from just one of the largest lunar impacts released an estimated 3 x 1026 joules; the same sized object falling to earth would release even more energy. [Fezer, pp. 45-46]
* Other. Other possibly significant heat sources are radioactive decay (some Creationists claim that radioactive decay rates were much higher during the Flood to account for consistently old radiometric dates); biological decay (think of the heat released in compost piles); and compression of sediments.

5.6 x 1026 joules is enough to heat the oceans to boiling. 3.7 x 1027 joules will vaporize them completely. Since steam and air have a lower heat capacity than water, the steam released will quickly raise the temperature of the atmosphere over 1000 C. At these temperatures, much of the atmosphere would boil off the Earth.

Aside from losing its atmosphere, Earth can only get rid of heat by radiating it to space, and it can't radiate significantly more heat than it gets from the sun unless it is a great deal hotter than it is now. (It is very nearly at thermal equilibrium now.) If there weren't many millions of years to radiate the heat from the above processes, the earth would still be unlivably hot.

All the mechanisms proposed for causing the Flood already provide more than enough energy to vaporize it as well. These additional factors only make the heat problem worse.
ClintonHammond is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2006, 03:23 PM   #43
ClintonHammond
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Windsor Ontario Canada
Posts: 3,237
Pt 2

How were limestone deposits formed? Much limestone is made of the skeletons of zillions of microscopic sea animals. Some deposits are thousands of meters thick. Were all those animals alive when the Flood started? If not, how do you explain the well-ordered sequence of fossils in the deposits? Roughly 1.5 x 1015 grams of calcium carbonate are deposited on the ocean floor each year. [Poldervaart, 1955] A deposition rate ten times as high for 5000 years before the Flood would still only account for less than 0.02% of limestone deposits.

How could a flood have deposited chalk? Chalk is largely made up of the bodies of plankton 700 to 1000 angstroms in diameter [Bignot, 1985]. Objects this small settle at a rate of .0000154 mm/sec. [Twenhofel, 1961] In a year of the Flood, they could have settled about half a meter.

How could the Flood deposit layers of solid salt? Such layers are sometimes meters in width, interbedded with sediments containing marine fossils. This apparently occurs when a body of salt water has its fresh-water intake cut off, and then evaporates. These layers can occur more or less at random times in the geological history, and have characteristic fossils on either side. Therefore, if the fossils were themselves laid down during a catastrophic flood, there are, it seems, only two choices:
(1) the salt layers were themselves laid down at the same time, during the heavy rains that began the flooding, or
(2) the salt is a later intrusion. I suspect that both will prove insuperable difficulties for a theory of flood deposition of the geologic column and its fossils. [Jackson et al, 1990]

How were sedimentary deposits recrystallized and plastically deformed in the short time since the Flood? The stretched pebble conglomerate in Death Valley National Monument (Wildrose Canyon Rd., 15 mi. south of Hwy. 190), for example, contains streambed pebbles metamorphosed to quartzite and stretched to 3 or more times their original length. Plastically deformed stone is also common around salt diapirs [Jackson et al, 1990].

How were hematite layers laid down? Standard theory is that they were laid down before Earth's atmosphere contained much oxygen. In an oxygen-rich regime, they would almost certainly be impossible.

How do you explain fossil mineralization? Mineralization is the replacement of the original material with a different mineral.

* Buried skeletal remains of modern fauna are negligibly mineralized, including some that biblical archaeology says are quite old - a substantial fraction of the age of the earth in this diluvian geology. For example, remains of Egyptian commoners buried near the time of Moses aren't extensively mineralized.
* Buried skeletal remains of extinct mammalian fauna show quite variable mineralization.
* Dinosaur remains are often extensively mineralized.
* Trilobite remains are usually mineralized - and in different sites, fossils of the same species are composed of different materials.

How are these observations explained by a sorted deposition of remains in a single episode of global flooding?

How does a flood explain the accuracy of "coral clocks"? The moon is slowly sapping the earth's rotational energy. The earth should have rotated more quickly in the distant past, meaning that a day would have been less than 24 hours, and there would have been more days per year. Corals can be dated by the number of "daily" growth layers per "annual" growth layer. Devonian corals, for example, show nearly 400 days per year. There is an exceedingly strong correlation between the "supposed age" of a wide range of fossils (corals, stromatolites, and a few others -- collected from geologic formations throughout the column and from locations all over the world) and the number of days per year that their growth pattern shows. The agreement between these clocks, and radiometric dating, and the theory of superposition is a little hard to explain away as the result of a number of unlucky coincidences in a 300-day-long flood. [Rosenberg & Runcorn, 1975; Scrutton, 1965; Wells, 1963]

Where were all the fossilized animals when they were alive? Schadewald [1982] writes:

"Scientific creationists interpret the fossils found in the earth's rocks as the remains of animals that perished in the Noachian Deluge. Ironically, they often cite the sheer number of fossils in 'fossil graveyards' as evidence for the Flood. In particular, creationists seem enamored by the Karroo Formation in Africa, which is estimated to contain the remains of 800 billion vertebrate animals (see Whitcomb and Morris, p. 160; Gish, p. 61). As pseudoscientists, creationists dare not test this major hypothesis that all of the fossilized animals died in the Flood.

"Robert E. Sloan, a paleontologist at the University of Minnesota, has studied the Karroo Formation. He asserts that the animals fossilized there range from the size of a small lizard to the size of a cow, with the average animal perhaps the size of a fox. A minute's work with a calculator shows that, if the 800 billion animals in the Karoo formation could be resurrected, there would be twenty-one of them for every acre of land on earth. Suppose we assume (conservatively, I think) that the Karroo Formation contains 1 percent of the vertebrate [land] fossils on earth. Then when the Flood began, there must have been at least 2100 living animals per acre, ranging from tiny shrews to immense dinosaurs. To a noncreationist mind, that seems a bit crowded."

A thousand kilometers' length of arctic coastal plain, according to experts in Leningrad, contains about 500,000 tons of tusks. Even assuming that the entire population was preserved, you seem to be saying that Russia had wall-to-wall mammoths before this "event."

Even if there was room physically for all the large animals which now exist only as fossils, how could they have all coexisted in a stable ecology before the Flood? Montana alone would have had to support a diversity of herbivores orders of magnitude larger than anything now observed.

Where did all the organic material in the fossil record come from? There are 1.16 x 1013 metric tons of coal reserves, and at least 100 times that much unrecoverable organic matter in sediments. A typical forest, even if it covered the entire earth, would supply only 1.9 x 1013 metric tons. [Ricklefs, 1993, p. 149]

How do you explain the relative commonness of aquatic fossils? A flood would have washed over everything equally, so terrestrial organisms should be roughly as abundant as aquatic ones (or more abundant, since Creationists hypothesize greater land area before the Flood) in the fossil record. Yet shallow marine environments account for by far the most fossils.
ClintonHammond is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2006, 03:26 PM   #44
ClintonHammond
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Windsor Ontario Canada
Posts: 3,237
References

Andrews, J. E., 1988. Soil-zone microfabrics in calcrete and in desiccation cracks from the Upper Jurassic Purbeck Formation of Dorset. Geological Journal 23(3): 261-270.

Bignot, G., 1985. Micropaleontology Boston: IHRDC, p. 75.

Clemmenson, L.B. and Abrahamsen, K., 1983. Aeolian stratification in desert sediments, Arran basin (Permian), Scotland. Sedimentology 30: 311-339.

Crimes, Peter, and Mary L Droser, 1992. Trace fossils and bioturbation: the other fossil record. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 23: 339-360.

Cristie, R.L., and McMillan, N.J. (eds.), 1991. Tertiary fossil forests of the Geodetic Hills, Axel Heiberg Island, Arctic Archipelago, Geological Survey of Canada, Bulletin 403., 227pp.

Dawson, J.W., 1868. Acadian Geology. The Geological Structure, Organic Remains, and Mineral Resources of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, and Prince Edward Island, 2nd edition. MacMillan and Co.: London, 694pp.

Donohoe, H.V. Jr. and Grantham, R.G. (eds.), 1989. Geological Highway Map of Nova Scotia, 2nd edition. Atlantic Geoscience Society, Halifax, Nova Scotia. AGS Special Publication no. 1, 1:640 000.

Eyles, N. and Miall, A.D., 1984, Glacial Facies. IN: Walker, R.G., Facies Models, 2nd edition. Geoscience Canada, Reprint Series 1: 15-38.

Ferguson, Laing, 1988. The fossil cliffs of Joggins. Nova Scotia Museum, Halifax, Nova Scotia.

Fezer, Karl D., 1993. "Creationism: Please Don't Call It Science" Creation/Evolution, 13:1 (Summer 1993), 45-49.

Gansser, A., 1964. Geology of the Himalayas, John Wiley and Sons, Ltd., New York.

Gastaldo, R. A., 1990, Early Pennsylvanian swamp forests in the Mary Lee coal zone, Warrior Basin, Alabama. in R. A. Gastaldo et. al., Carboniferous Coastal Environments and Paleocommunities of the Mary Lee Coal Zone, Marion and Walker Counties, Alabama. Guidebook for the Field Trip VI, Alabama Geological Survey, Tuscaloosa, Alabama. pp. 41-54.

Gilette, D.D. and Lockley, M.G. (eds.), 1989. Dinosaur Tracks and Traces, Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 454pp.

Gore, Rick, 1993. Dinosaurs. National Geographic, 183(1) (Jan. 1993): 2-54.

Grieve, R. A. F., 1997. Extraterrestrial impact events: the record in the rocks and the stratigraphic record. Palaeogeography, Paleoclimatology, Paleoecology 132: 5-23.

Hubert, J.F., and Mertz, K.A., Jr., 1984. Eolian sandstones in Upper Triassic-Lower Jurassic red beds of the Fundy Basin, Nova Scotia. Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, 54: 798-810.

Jackson, M.P.A., et al., 1990. Salt diapirs of the Great Kavir, Central Iran. Geological Society of America, Memoir 177, 139pp.

James, N. P. & P. W. Choquette (eds.), 1988. Paleokarst, Springer-Verlag, New York.

Kocurek, G., and Dott, R.H., 1981. Distinctions and uses of stratification types in the interpretation of eolian sand. Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, 51(2): 579-595.

Miall, A. D., 1996. The Geology of Fluvial Deposits, Springer-Verlag, New York.

Moore, James R., 1973. "Charles Lyell and the Noachian Deluge", in Dundes, 1988, The Flood Myth, University of California Press, Berkeley.

Newell, N., 1982. Creation and Evolution, Columbia U. Press, p. 62.

Poldervaart, Arie, 1955. Chemistry of the earth's crust. pp. 119-144 In: Poldervaart, A., ed., Crust of the Earth, Geological Society of America Special Paper 62, Waverly Press, MD.

Reinhardt, J., and Sigleo, W.R. (eds.), 1989. Paleosols and weathering through geologic time: principles and applications. Geological Society of America Special Paper 216, 181pp.

Ricklefs, Robert, 1993. The Economy of Nature, W. H. Freeman, New York.

Robb, A. J. III, 1992. Rain-impact microtopography (RIM); an experimental analogue for fossil examples from the Maroon Formation, Colorado. Journal of Sedimentary Petrology 62(3): 530-535.

Rosenberg, G. D. & Runcorn, S. K. (Eds), 1975. Growth rhythms and the history of the earth's rotation. Willey Interscience, New York.

Schadewald, Robert, 1982. Six 'Flood' arguments Creationists can't answer. Creation/Evolution 9: 12-17.

Schmitz, B., B. Peucker-Ehrenbrink, M. Lindstrom, & M. Tassinari, 1997. Accretion rates of meteorites and cosmic dust in the Early Ordovician. Science 278: 88-90.

Scrutton, C. T., ( 1964 ) 1965. Periodicity in Devonian coral growth. Palaeontology, 7(4): 552-558, Plates 86-87.

Short, D. A., J. G. Mengel, T. J. Crowley, W. T. Hyde and G. R. North, 1991. Filtering of Milankovitch Cycles by Earth's Geography. Quaternary Research. 35, 157-173. (Re an independent method of dating the Green River formation)

Stewart, W.N., 1983. Paleontology and the Evolution of Plants. Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 405pp.

Thackray, G. D., 1994. Fossil nest of sweat bees (Halictinae) from a Miocene paleosol, Rusinga Island, western Kenya. Journal of Paleontology 68(4): 795-800.

Twenhofel, William H., 1961. Treatise on Sedimentation, Dover, p. 50-52.

Weast, Robert C., 1974. Handbook of Chemistry and Physics, 55th edition, CRC Press, Cleveland, OH.

Wells, J. W., 1963. Coral growth and geochronometry. Nature 197: 948-950.

Whitcomb, J.C. Jr. & H.M. Morris, 1961. The Genesis Flood. Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., Philadelphia PA.

Wilson, J. L., 1975. Carbonate Facies in Geologic History. Springer-Verlag, New York.

Wright, V. P. (ed.), 1986. Paleosols: Their Recognition and Interpretation, Princeton University Press, New Jersey.

Wright, V. P., 1994. Paleosols in shallow marine sequences. Earth-Science Reviews, 37: 367-395. See also pp. 135-137.

Yun, Zhang, 1989. Multicellular thallophytes with differentiated tissues from Late Proterozoic phosphate rocks of South China. Lethaia 22: 113-132.

Yuretich, Richard F., 1984. Yellowstone fossil forests: New evidence for burial in place, Geology 12, 159-162. See also Fritz, W.J. & Yuretich, R.F., Comment and reply, Geology 20, 638-639.

Zimmer, Carl, 1992. Peeling the big blue banana. Discover 13(1): 46-47.

And a special thanks to Talkorigins.org. where this is just one point out of 11 draining the flood 'myth' and Noahs "ark"

When "Creationists" can even begin to answer these few of the many flaws in their proposals, I'll take their myth maybe a fraction as seriously as they do.

Until then, I'm simply forced to side with those who agree that the weight of evidence is against there every having been any global flood.
ClintonHammond is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2006, 03:27 PM   #45
fortuneandglory
IndyFan
 
fortuneandglory's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Marshall College
Posts: 200
And you mine. Lets not get into spelling corrections, really, how immature. Excuse me, I mispoke. Its not mud, I just didn't read fully. Please, enjoy!

Quote:

Sea originating fossils have been found at high altitudes of every continent.

The oldest known living trees, Bristlecone Pines in California, are about 5000 years old. This would coincide with the recovery of the earth after the flood.

The Origin of Civilization appeared near the resting place of the Ark at about the same time that the flood occurred.

Geologist classify rock formations by the type of rock they contain. A layer of the same type of rock is called a stratum. Many scientist believe that certain types of stratum originated in certain time periods such as the Eocene, Triassic, Jurassic and Cretaceous periods of time. There are many places on the earth where the order of these strata in reversed. Examples of this are the Matterhorn and Mythen peaks in the Alps. The order of the strata has been completely reversed in respect to the earth around it. Though many explanations have been offered for this phenomenon, the catastrophic effects of a flood as described in the Bible is still the best explanation.

Sedimentary deposits cover large parts of the earth. These are the type of deposits that result from movement of water.

An analysis of 30,000 radiocarbon dating results published in the "Radiocarbon" journal shows an unmistakable spike in the


death of living things about 5,000 years ago.

Fossils of once living organisms have been found in places not suitable for their habitat:



In Lincoln County, Wyoming fossils have been found of an alligator, deep sea bass, sunfish, crustaceans, and palm leaves. Obviously these would not grow well in Wyoming's climate. It also suggest that at one time Wyoming was covered water. The fossils of the life found in this vicinity are very well preserved indicating a fast burial and preservation.

The Florissant, Colorado fossil beds contain fossilized insects that are preserved remarkably well. In addition, the remains of giant sequoia trees have been found here. The sequoia trees and many of the types of insects do not exist in this region today.

(1)Volcanic rocks are found interbedded with sedimentary rocks of all supposed geologic ages. This correlates with the Biblical implication that the "fountains of the great deep" poured out their contents throughout the flood (Genesis 8:2).

(4)Radiometric dating performed on volcanic rocks from the eruption of Mount St. Helens in 1986 indicated that the rocks were between .34 million years to 2.8 million years old. This suggests that the radiometric dating methods to determine the earth are at the best inaccurate.

The shape of the continents hints that they may have been connected at one time. The fossil records of mountain ranges seem to indicate that the mountains were created by the collision of two continents. It is also noted that earthquakes are caused by movement of continents along fault lines. This supports the theory of plate tectonics. A catastrophe such as a the Biblical flood would create enough force to rearrange continents. In fact a flood of these proportions easily becomes a "best fit" for the geological data that exist today.

Although scientific evidence does exist to support many aspects of the Bible, conclusive evidence may never exist to prove or disprove these events. There are so many variables and aspects of science it is easy to interpret the data in a manner pleasing to your desire. I'm sure that Noah had no way to prove his belief in God's word to him (only his family believed him). But he found enough faith to work for 100 years to build a boat that people said he could not use. Scientific discussions may provide a spark of faith to believe the Bible. But, in reality, the choice of what to believe is based on faith. Some people have faith in science or mankind. Others put their faith in God.

And facts do hurt sometimes. Fake ones just make me angry, and make you look like an ass.
fortuneandglory is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2006, 03:39 PM   #46
ClintonHammond
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Windsor Ontario Canada
Posts: 3,237
"he found enough faith to work for 100 years to build a boat that..."

Wouldn't have been capable of supporting it's own weight, never mind the weight of the tons of animals he's supposed to have brought on board (Especially if he had to bring dionosaurs) The largest contemporary wooden ships on the ocean are about 300 feet long, and these require reinforcing with iron straps and leak so badly they must be constantly pumped... The supposed Ark was 450 feet long... (Gen 6.15)
ClintonHammond is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2006, 03:47 PM   #47
Doc Savage
IndyFan
 
Doc Savage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The 86th Floor...
Posts: 747
So, I see you two have met...
Doc Savage is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2006, 07:21 PM   #48
fortuneandglory
IndyFan
 
fortuneandglory's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Marshall College
Posts: 200
If you had read my post thouroghly, i'm presenting opposing information. I do not in any way believe that dinosaurs were brought on the Ark.
Read before you insult.

And, who says Noah didn't bring one of each type of animal? Who says he needs every species? The other species of animals might possibly have evolved out of the animals that Noah brought on board. In any case, you seemed to have abandoned giving so called strength to your other claims...

Oh, yeah, next time, if you want to convince someone, dont spam the boards with three pages of information.

LOL DOC!
fortuneandglory is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-06-2006, 12:42 AM   #49
Tennessee R
IndyFan
 
Tennessee R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 1,008
If we are to take the information that the Bible gives us, we can say that the boat, fictional or not, held 2 pairs of each kind of unclean animals, (as are mentioned in Leviticus 11 and Deuteronomy 14) and 7 pairs of each kind of clean animals.
It doesn't say if:
1. Kind means they took a german shepherd, a chihuahua, a cocker spaniel, etc. or just 2 pairs of dogs.

2. They were babies, or adults (The babies would have been much smaller, slept longer in some cases, required less food in some cases)

Now if we were to assume that they took 4 adults of each "brand" of dog, on the ark, I might say that they could fill up a whole boat with dogs.

However, should we assume that they took 4 baby dogs, and this was the total amount of dogs taken on the ark,
In theory, it is possible that all of the basic "kinds" of animals could fit in an ark about 3 stories tall, an american football field and a half long.

Isn't it?
Tennessee R is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-06-2006, 01:09 AM   #50
ClintonHammond
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Windsor Ontario Canada
Posts: 3,237
"In theory, it is possible that all of the basic "kinds" of animals could fit in an ark about 3 stories tall, an american football field and a half long.

Isn't it?"

No... it's not...

"i'm presenting opposing information"
With absolutley NO support...
ClintonHammond is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:09 PM.