• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Noah's Ark found?

Interesting choice of words. What was so offensive to you, besides everything I say?
 
154 said:
Imagine if, prior to the cataclysmic changes of the earth and environment of the Flood,
the atmosphere was much more of a heavy vapor canopy, of a greater pressure and shielded much more of the uv rays.
Earth could have essentially been a big hyperbaric chamber.
Climate could be generally consistent and uniform globally.
Large, thick vegetation could have grown at the poles.
Plants and animals could have gotten significantly larger.
Life expectancies could have been much longer.
A lot of things could have been seriously different.
Click to expand...

Then, everybody would be dead within the first few hours.
Not to mention, a canopy more than a a few tenth of feet thick (a fraction of what'd be needed for a world-wide deluge) would have blocked not only the UV but most light radiation, making photosynthesis useless...

Also... Where did all that water go? If it is under the tectonic plaque as some creationists pretend, how come sysmologist have not detected this layer of water?
 
The text indicates that water was released as rainfall from the atmosphere, which apparently may not have happened before prior to that moment, and that "the fountains of the deep" were released.
It was not all in any canopy.
And any canopy could vary greatly in thickness and density per pressure.

It's academic at best anyway. Believers do not know. Deniers do not know.
To claim you know how it all was not is as unrealistic as me claiming I know how it was.
 
154 said:
Deniers do not know.
To claim you know how it all was not is as unrealistic as me claiming I know how it was.
Click to expand...

Utterly false. It has been explained to you thoroughly how impossible the whole thing is.


PS Is the ark story one part of the bible you believe literally?
 
154 said:
The text indicates that water was released as rainfall from the atmosphere, which apparently may not have happened before prior to that moment, and that "the fountains of the deep" were released.
It was not all in any canopy.
And any canopy could vary greatly in thickness and density per pressure.

It's academic at best anyway. Believers do not know. Deniers do not know.
To claim you know how it all was not is as unrealistic as me claiming I know how it was.
Click to expand...

You mean I can't say the flood of Noah was a myth with any certainty?
 
kerikiwi said:
Utterly false. It has been explained to you thoroughly how impossible the whole thing is.
Click to expand...
Says you. I disagree.

PS Is the ark story one part of the bible you believe literally?
Click to expand...
Do you think it is a parable?
Yes, I believe it. No, I don't have all the answers. Yes, there are real questions. You do not believe. Great. Thanks again.
If you're going to keep swarming me, can we move along a little bit please?

noreligion said:
You mean I can't say the flood of Noah was a myth with any certainty?
Click to expand...
You can say whatever you want. I was speaking to the mechanics of the environmental considerations whether pro or con in your perspective.
 
Last edited:
noreligion said:
You mean I can't say the flood of Noah was a myth with any certainty?
Click to expand...

If you like I could prove its nothing but an exaggerated myth designed to glorify the mesopotamian God Enlil (the one who actually sent the original flood that Noah is plagiarised from), but theres little point when the only ones who need to understand that lesson won't open their ears to hear or their eyes to see, because theyre scared that they have it wrong, they really already know they have it wrong which is why they post here desperately trying to show people that their faith is the kind that needs evidence or its worthless

unfortunately the only thing they ever open is their mouths.

;)
 
154 said:
If you're going to keep swarming me, can we move along a little bit please?
Click to expand...

Swarming you? That , like noah's ark, didn't happen. There is only one of me.
I just asked a question and repeated it until you answered.
 
Radrook said:
Startling evidence for Noah’s Flood

http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v15/i1/flood.asp
Click to expand...

Putting together all of his observations, Dr Brand thus came to the conclusion that the configurations and characteristics of the animals trackways made on the submerged sand surfaces most closely resembled the fossilized quadruped trackways of the Coconino Sandstone. Indeed, when the locomotion behaviour of the living amphibians is taken into account, the fossilized trackways can be interpreted as implying that the animals must have been entirely under water (not swimming at the surface) and moving upslope (against the current) in an attempt to get out of the water. This interpretation fits with the concept of a global Flood, which overwhelmed even four-footed reptiles and amphibians that normally spend most of their time in the water.
Click to expand...

Even if it is true that these fossilised footprints were formed underwater, why would that be evidence for a global flood 4,000 years ago?
 
154 said:
The text indicates that water was released as rainfall from the atmosphere, which apparently may not have happened before prior to that moment, and that "the fountains of the deep" were released.
It was not all in any canopy.
And any canopy could vary greatly in thickness and density per pressure.
Click to expand...

Why are you trying to "scientifically" explain a miracle, anyway ? Perhaps your faith isn't as strong as you'd have us believe.

It's academic at best anyway. Believers do not know. Deniers do not know.
To claim you know how it all was not is as unrealistic as me claiming I know how it was.
Click to expand...

Nice try at equivocation. It's obvious you have no understanding of science, and therefore no means of determining truth save for your own gut feelings. I'm sorry for you. You're missing out on a lot of real knowledge. But that doesn't give you the right to claim that no one knows anything just because you're ignorant.
 
154 said:
It's academic at best anyway. Believers do not know. Deniers do not know.
To claim you know how it all was not is as unrealistic as me claiming I know how it was.
Click to expand...

This is not the case. We know that it could not possibly have happened the way believers think it happened unless the fundamental conditions, i..e. the laws of physics, were quite different then than they are now. The creation and disappearance of the water would require miraculous intervention. Furthermore, the gathering of the animals would require miraculous intervention. The care and survival of the animals would require miraculous intervention. The dispersal of the animals would require miraculous intervention. The survival of aquatic species during the flood would require miraculous intervention. The reappearance of plant life would require miraculous intervention. If the "kind" theory is used to get around volume and survival issues on the ark, the rapid evolution of life after the deluge would require miraculous intervention.

Why the reluctance to admit it?

Meanwhile, on a different note, some people may wonder at my fascination with Noah's longevity and survival into Abraham's time. Allow me to explain. Abraham lived within historical times, approxmiately 2000 BC if the Bible is to be believed. The implication that Noah survived into that period is that during historical times there was a person alive on the Earth who was a common ancestor to every single one of the Earth's many many millions of inhabitants. All races. All religions. All languages. All geographic regions of the world. At that time in history, there were at least 20 million people alive on the surface of the Earth, and every darned one of them was descended from the same, living, ancestor.

You really believe that? Anyone? Really?
 
I found a link to the article cited in the Creation artile that Radrook had discussed.

http://geology.geoscienceworld.org/cgi/content/abstract/19/12/1201

This is the one about those uphill tracks in the Grand Canyon. I'm a bit fuzzy on the details.

I have to get going to work, so I haven't had time to actually read the article. This evening I'll take a glance at it. Meanwhile, if anyone is interested, how about taking a look at it and seeing if the Creation article accurately describes the contents of the original?
 
Meadmaker said:
This is not the case. We know that it could not possibly have happened the way believers think it happened unless the fundamental conditions, i..e. the laws of physics, were quite different then than they are now. The creation and disappearance of the water would require miraculous intervention. Furthermore, the gathering of the animals would require miraculous intervention. The care and survival of the animals would require miraculous intervention. The dispersal of the animals would require miraculous intervention. The survival of aquatic species during the flood would require miraculous intervention. The reappearance of plant life would require miraculous intervention. If the "kind" theory is used to get around volume and survival issues on the ark, the rapid evolution of life after the deluge would require miraculous intervention.

Why the reluctance to admit it?

Meanwhile, on a different note, some people may wonder at my fascination with Noah's longevity and survival into Abraham's time. Allow me to explain. Abraham lived within historical times, approxmiately 2000 BC if the Bible is to be believed. The implication that Noah survived into that period is that during historical times there was a person alive on the Earth who was a common ancestor to every single one of the Earth's many many millions of inhabitants. All races. All religions. All languages. All geographic regions of the world. At that time in history, there were at least 20 million people alive on the surface of the Earth, and every darned one of them was descended from the same, living, ancestor.

You really believe that? Anyone? Really?
Click to expand...

As if the incest to populate the Earth with Adam and Eve wasn't bad enough god had to 'perfect' it again with the aftermath of the flood. Kinda funny how the Old Testament seems to be a textbook on the different ways one can commit incest. Any question as to why so many Christians have their morals so screwed up? If you read and believe immoral stuff as truth you are going to become immoral.
 
154 said:
The text indicates that water was released as rainfall from the atmosphere, which apparently may not have happened before prior to that moment, etc..........
Click to expand...

It never rained before the flood? No wonder they were taken aback.

Ah well, it never rains but it pours.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom