Beliefs Regarding The Flood

[JackH]

Fossilized sea life lies atop every major mountain range on earth-far above sea level and usually far from the nearest body of water.

YECs damage far too many brain cells watching Dr. Dino videos and reading articles at YEC cult propaganda machines like Answers in Genesis.

This may be of interest:

"To summarize:

It is not necessary to posit a global flood to explain marine fossils at high elevations. Snelling knows this.

Catastrophism cannot explain the fossil assemblage of Mississippian limestones such as the Redwall. It is difficult to see how this mixture of fossils (which contains more than just crinoids, as Snelling acknowledges) could have stayed together as a coherent package in a global flood.

Local ecological zones are preserved at places in Mississippian limestones. Were these mounds carried by the flood and then deposited gently on the surface without breaking apart? I don’t think so.

The young-Earth catastrophist arguments of AiG might sound good to Christians without a strong science background, but this whole system simply does not work, and should not be used for apologetics and evangelism."

Six bad arguments from Answers in Genesis (Part 1)

 

[JackH]

This as well

You are agreeing with Agricola?

Despite your eloquent explanation from Scripture, I do not think you have convinced him that the Flood was not global.

You did, however, convince me.

 

[valiant]

You are agreeing with Agricola?

On that point, yes. Clearly much water from a great flood would eventually be absorbed by the ground. Other would be taken up by filling the depressions under the sea caused by earth convulsion.

I accept knowledge from ALL sources, weigh it, and then come to my own conclusions.

Thus I accept that the dinosaur pictures on ancient weavings demonstrate that the weavers knew what dinosaurs looked like..

 

[JackH]

Thus I accept that the dinosaur pictures on ancient weavings demonstrate that the weavers knew what dinosaurs looked like..

What ancient weavings?

Please provide a link to said ancient weaving to include where it came from.

Artistic expression does not necessarily mean that the subject is/was real, does it?

Do you likewise believe that there is fossil footprint evidence that proves that dinosaurs and humans coexisted?

 

[JackH]

On that point, yes. Clearly much water from a great flood would eventually be absorbed by the ground. Other would be taken up by filling the depressions under the sea caused by earth convulsion.

Obviously you need less water to dispose of under your scenario that the flood was not global.

Where do you think all the water came from in the first place?

How about you, Agricola?

Where do you think all the water came from?

And you other YECs?

 

[valiant]

Obviously you need less water to dispose of under your scenario that the flood was not global.

Where do you think all the water came from in the first place?

The Bible gives the answer. 'The fountains of the great deep were opened up.' whether by melting ice at the ice caps or by massive earthquakes causing huge tsunamis, or both. And at the same time continual rain which occurring in the Middle East would indicate very unusual atmospheric conditions..

It is very probable at this stage that the mountains were a lot lower than today

 

[valiant]

What ancient weavings?

now this will test whether you are a REAL scientist or one of the spurious ones. In other words are you willing to look at genuine evidence no matter who possesses it? These ancient weavings were presented to the Creation Science museum by the explorer who discovered them. I may not believe all they teach but I do not believe that they would manufacture fakes and get someone to testify to giving them to them if they were not genuine.

Please provide a link to said ancient weaving to include where it came from.

I did see pictures of the weavings. But I do not at present have the link. It was on my previous computer which suddenly went caput (either the evolutionists or the creationists were after me).

I also have a picture (although not on my computer) of a dinosaur picture which was on a painting in, I believe, Italy or Austria, painted in the mid second millennium AD long before dinosaurs were known about. I have no reason to doubt it.

And certainly scientific expeditions demonstrated by sonar that there was some unusual creature or creatures in the depths of Loch Ness.

So I do believe that dinosaurs have outlived the dinosaur age. (Compare the coelacanth)

Anyway LOL if we did not have crocodiles today, but had found them fossilised, we would have seen them as dinosaurs.

Artistic expression does not necessarily mean that the subject is/was real, does it?

Not today, but artistic impressions so long ago had nothing to model themselves on. yet they clearly depict dinosaurs. c'mon, if they exist they must prove that the artists/weavers had seen a dinosaur or had one clearly described by someone who had seen one. If you dismiss that I don't have much confidence in your willingness to accept evidence.

Do you likewise believe that there is fossil footprint evidence that proves that dinosaurs and humans coexisted?

I have not studied the subject. I am not sure that it is important enough to spend a lot of time on. I have no axe to grind. It is not a subject fought about over here. Although I do have a friend who is Professor of Thermodynamics at a leading English University (who gave me the picture of the picture of the dinosaur mentioned above) who has grave doubts about evolutionary theory.

 

[JackH]

now this will test whether you are a REAL scientist or one of the spurious ones. In other words are you willing to look at genuine evidence no matter who possesses it? These ancient weavings were presented to the Creation Science museum by the explorer who discovered them. I may not believe all they teach but I do not believe that they would manufacture fakes and get someone to testify to giving them to them if they were not genuine.

What Creation Science museum is that?

Who was the explorer?

Sure I want to look at the "genuine" evidence.

 

[JackRT]

The biblical global flood supposedly covered the planet. Mount Everest is 8,848 meters tall and the diameter of the earth at the equator, on the other hand, is 12,756.8 km. All we have to do is calculate the volume of water to fill a sphere with a radius of the Earth + Mount Everest; then we subtract the volume of a sphere with a radius of the Earth. Now, I know this won't yield a perfect result, because the Earth isn't a perfect sphere, but it will serve to give a general idea about the amounts involved.
So, here are the calculations:
First, Everest
V= 4/3 * pi * r^3
= 4/3 * pi * (6387.248 km)^3
= 1.09151 x 10^12 cubic kilometres

Now, the Earth at sea level

V = 4/3 * pi * r^3
= 4/3 * pi * (6378.4 km)^3
= 1.08698 x 10^12 cubic kilometres
The difference between these two figures, 4.525 x 10^9 cubic kilometres is the amount of water needed to just cover the Earth. Or, to put into a more sensible number, 4,525,000,000 cubic kilometres. This is one helluva lot of water.
For those who think it might come from the polar ice caps, please don't forget that water is more dense than ice, and thus that the volume of ice present in those ice caps would have to be more than the volume of water necessary.

Some interesting physical effects of all that water, too. How much weight do you think that is? Well, water at STP weighs in at 1 gram/cubic centimetre so:
4.252x10^9 km^3 of water,
x 10^6 (= cubic meters),
x 10^6 (= cubic centimetres),
x 1 g/cm^3 (= grams),
x 1o^-3 (= kilograms),
= 4.525X 10^21 kg.
Ever wonder what the effects of that much weight would be? Well, many times in the near past (i.e., the Pleistocene), continental ice sheets covered many of the northern states and most all of Canada. For the sake of argument, let's call the area covered by the Wisconsinian advance (the latest and greatest) was 10,000,000,000 km^2, by an average thickness of 1 km of ice (a good estimate...it was thicker in the zones of accumulation and much thinner elsewhere at the ablating edges. Now, 1.00x10^7 km^2 X 1 km thickness equals 1.00x10^7 km^3 of ice. Now, remember earlier that we noted that it would take 4.525x10^9 km^3 of water for the flood? Well, looking at the Wisconsinian glaciation, all that ice (which is frozen water, remember?) would be precisely 0.222 percent of the water needed for the flood.
Well, the Wisconsinian glacial stade ended about 25,000 BP as compared for the approximately supposedly 4,000 BP flood event. Due to these late Pleistocene glaciations some 21,000 years preceding the supposed biblical flood, the mass of the ice had actually depressed the crust of the Earth. That crust, now that the ice is gone, is slowly rising (called glacial rebound); and this rebound can be measured, in places (like northern Wisconsin), in centimetres/year. Sea level was also lowered some 10's of meters due to the very finite amount of water in the Earth's hydrosphere being locked up in glacial ice sheets (geologists call this glacioeustacy).

Now, glacial rebound can only be measured, obviously, in glaciated terrains, i.e., the Sahara is not rebounding as it was not glaciated during the Pleistocene. This lack of rebound is noted by laser ranged interferometery and satellite geodesy, as well as by geomorphology. Glacial striae on bedrock, eskers, tills, moraines, rouche moutenees, drumlins, kame and kettle topography, fjords, deranged fluvial drainage and erratic blocks all betray a glacier's passage. Needless to say, these geomorphological expressions are not found everywhere on Earth (for instance, like the Sahara). Therefore, although extensive, the glaciers were a local (not global) is scale. Yet, at only 0.222% the size of the supposed flood, they have had a PROFOUND and EASILY recognisable and measurable effects on the lands. Yet, the supposed flood of Noah, supposedly global in extent, supposedly much more recent, and supposedly orders of magnitude larger in scale; has exactly zero measurable effects and zero evidence for it's occurrence.

Even further, let us take a realistic and dispassionate look at the other claims relating to global flooding. Particularly, in order to flood the Earth to the Genesis requisite depth of 10 cubits (5 m) above the summit of Mt. Ararat (5,151 m AMSL), it would obviously require a water depth of 5,155.7 m, or over three miles above mean sea level. In order to accomplish this little task, it would require the previously noted additional 4.525 x 10^9 km^3 of water to flood the Earth to this depth. The Earth's present hydrosphere (the sum total of all waters in, on and above the Earth) totals only 1.37 x 10^9 km^3. Where would this additional 4.525 x 10^9 km^3 of water come from? It cannot come from water vapour (i.e., clouds) because the atmospheric pressure would be 840 times greater than standard pressure of the atmosphere today. Further, the latent heat released when the vapour condenses into liquid water would be enough to raise the temperature of the Earth's atmosphere to approximately 3,570 C.

Someone has suggested that all the water needed to flood the Earth existed as liquid water surrounding the globe (i.e., a "vapour canopy"). This, of course, is staggeringly stupid. What is keeping that much water from falling to the Earth? There is a little property called gravity that would cause it to fall.

Let's look into that from a physical standpoint. To flood the Earth, we have already seen that it would require 4.252 x 10^9 km^3 of water with a mass of 4.525 x 10^21 kg. When this amount of water is floating above the Earth's surface, it stored an enormous amount of potential energy, which is converted to kinetic energy when it falls, which, in turn, is converted to heat upon impact with the Earth. The amount of heat released is immense:
Potential energy: E=M*g*H, where
M = mass of water,
g = gravitational constant and,
H = height of water above surface.
Now, going with the Genesis version of the Noachian Deluge as lasting 40 days and nights, the amount of mass falling to Earth each day is 4.525 x 10^21 kg/40 24 hr. periods. This equals 1.10675 x 10^20 kilograms daily. Using H as 16,000 meters), the energy released each day is 1.73584 x 10^25 joules. The amount of energy the Earth would have to radiate per m^2/sec is energy divided by surface area of the Earth times number of seconds in one day. That is: e = 1.735384 x 10^25/(4*3.14159* ((6386)^2*86,400)) = 391,935.0958 j/m^2/s.
Currently, the Earth radiates energy at the rate of approximately 215 joules/m2/sec and the average temperature is 280 K. Using the Stefan- Boltzman 4th power law to calculate the increase in temperature:
E (increase)/E (normal) = T (increase)/T^4 (normal)

E (normal) = 215
E (increase) = 391,935.0958
T (normal) = 280.

Turn the crank, and T (increase) equals 1800 K.

The temperature would thusly rise 1800 K, or 1,526.84 C (that's well above melting temperature of lead). It would be highly unlikely that anything short of fused quartz would survive such an onslaught. Also, the water level would have to rise at an average rate of 5.5 inches/min; and in 13 minutes would be in excess of 6 ft deep.
Finally, at 1800 K water would not exist as liquid.

It is quite clear that a Biblical Flood is and was quite impossible.

By Dr. Marty Leipzig at:

*http://www.holysmoke.org/cretins/fludmath.htm

 

[flob]

It's quite clear Dr Leipzig doesn't know God.
he might call Him impossible

 

[CRC]

As the offspring of the Flood survivors migrated to distant places and as time elapsed, details became distorted and the account was adapted to local religious concepts. But it can hardly be a coincidence that in primitive legends around the world there is recollection of a great flood that destroyed mankind with the exception of a few who were preserved together. Memory of this is found in Mesopotamia and other parts of Asia, in Australia and the Pacific islands, among scores of Indian tribes in North and South America, in stories told among the ancient Greeks and the Romans, in Scandinavia, and among African tribes. Many of these accounts make mention of animals’ being preserved in a boat along with humans. Paralleling the Bible record, some relate that birds were sent out to determine when the water had receded. (Compare Genesis 7:7-10; 8:6-12.) No other ancient event is so widely recollected.

 

[JackRT]

There may be several grains of truth to the flood mythology of Noah and similar mythologies from elsewhere in the ancient Middle East. About 25 years ago it was discovered (" Noah's Flood" by Ryan and Pitman) that in antiquity the Black Sea was a freshwater lake with a water level at least 155 meters (510 feet) below its present level. It was cut off from the Mediterranean Sea by a silt plug in the Straits of Bosporus. This plug broke through about 5600 BC. It created an immense waterfall whose sound was most likely audible for 100 or more miles. The Black Sea basin filled to its present level over a period of several weeks. It is estimated that the shore line advanced at the rate of a mile or more per day. For the people living around the lake it was a catastrophe of immense magnitude. It was likely the single most memorable flood in all of human history. The racial memory of this event probably inspired the Gilgamesh epic which in turn inspired the Noah narrative in the Bible. The evidence for this flood is scientifically solid. This prompted the National Geographic Society to finance an underwater search along the ancient shoreline for evidence of pre-flood human habitation. This search has been successful! A settlement has been found at a depth of 90 meters approximately 12 miles off the coast of Turkey. It is in a remarkable state of preservation because it is located in an area of the Black Sea where the water is completely devoid of oxygen with the effect that biological decomposition does not take place. This means that wooden artifacts such as tools, planks, housing beams etc are preserved intact. What is also quite amazing is that while there is solid scientific evidence for this local flood some 7600 YBP, there is no evidence at all for a worldwide flood just 4300 YBP. One would think that a more recent, more catastrophic event would have wiped out evidence of the earlier Black Sea event.

 

[Agricola]

Obviously you need less water to dispose of under your scenario that the flood was not global.

Where do you think all the water came from in the first place?

How about you, Agricola?

Where do you think all the water came from?

And you other YECs?

Revelation 21:1 Then I saw "a new heaven and a new earth," for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and there was no longer any sea.

God had an original blue print for earth and humans and all creation. Satan and sin destroyed that. Revelation indicates there is no sea, so what if the original blue print created in Genesis did not have any huge expanses of water. I see the earth being created in Genesis having a significantly larger land mass than water, however God provided us with more than enough water under ground, used wisely it would last humans for ever.

ALso the conditions were totally different pre flood, we know animals grew huge aka dinosaurs, humans lived long lives of hundreds of years, this also supports that the atmosphere held a vast amount of water, creating a super greenhouse where life will flourish.

Come the flood, this water from the atmosphere was realsed, the earth opened up all over the globe to allow huge amounts of underground water to come out the ground, as the water was released, land masses were pushed upwards to form mountain ranges, the depths of the oceans were increased as the earth's crust parted,

The fossils on top of mountains are not a result of the flood water, but simply the fact it used to be underwater permanently until the destruction of the earth by God pushed them up to form mountains.

The water from flood has receded back to the under ground stores, which are estimated to be AT LEAST 3 times the amount of surface water.

 

[Tintin]

Jackie. You need to stop making multiple accounts.

 

[JackH]

What is also quite amazing is that while there is solid scientific evidence for this local flood some 7600 YBP, there is no evidence at all for a worldwide flood just 4300 YBP.

And that sums it up in a nutshell.

 

[JackH]

Jackie. You need to stop making multiple accounts.

Bet me.

If I'm JackRT, I leave this forum forever.

If I'm not, you leave this forum forever.

Are we on?

 

[JackRT]

I chose this nick to honour my recently deceased canine companion of 15 years --- a Jack Russell Terrier. JackH is posting from the USA whereas I am posting from Canada. I do wonder a bit about his claimed age.

 

[JackH]

I chose this nick to honour my recently deceased canine companion of 15 years --- a Jack Russell Terrier. JackH is posting from the USA whereas I am posting from Canada. I do wonder a bit about his claimed age.

I'm also a French model.

Bon jour.

It must be true because you just read it on the internet.

But let's cut to the chase.

The information you provided on no global flood, but possible local floods in Mesopotamia and elsewhere makes sense to me.

For starters, how old do you think the Earth is?

Do you believe that dinosaurs coexisted with humans?

 

[JackRT]

The information you provided on no global flood, but possible local floods in Mesopotamia and elsewhere makes sense to me.

It should. The evidence points powerfully to this.

For starters, how old do you think the Earth is?

The evidence in the stones and the bones and the stars indicates a vastly old universe. The Big Bang was about 13.4 billion years ago but the earth itself was formed a mere 4 billion years ago.

Do you believe that dinosaurs coexisted with humans?

No. Again, the evidence indicates that the dinosaurs became extinct about 65 million years ago whereas anatomically modern man dates to about 200,000 years ago.

 

[JackH]

It should. The evidence points powerfully to this.



The evidence in the stones and the bones and the stars indicates a vastly old universe. The Big Bang was about 13.4 billion years ago but the earth itself was formed a mere 4 billion years ago.



No. Again, the evidence indicates that the dinosaurs became extinct about 65 million years ago whereas anatomically modern man dates to about 200,000 years ago.

We are on the same page, at least with respect to these issues.

I'll try to keep my comments pertinent to the topic of this thread, the Flood.

One related issue is dating methods.

The Young Earth Creationists in these forums repeatedly say radiometric dating and other methods are unreliable.

I disagree.

You identify yourself in your Profile as a scientist and an educator.

How would you educate these YECs that dating methods are reliable enough to give us fairly accurate dates on the age of the earth, age of dinosaur and human fossils, and the like?

Reliable enough to determine, at the very least, that dinosaur fossils are millions and not thousands of years old.

Reliable enough to determine that much of the geological record is not less than 6,000 years old, as YECs would have us believe in that they say much of it resulted from a global flood 4,000 to 5,000 years ago.