Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

The Flood Legend

page: 3
1
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 19 2005 @ 01:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by resistance
Within each "kind" lies the genetic material for a vast variety of species and types. All the races were in the genes of Adam and Eve, hence passed down to Noah, and eventually when the time was right, God brought them out (the races).

The aborigines have been in Aus a minumum of forty thousand years. Their presence here has continued uninterupted. How do you account for their existence?

Also.. [again] 'kind' is not a scientific term.. it is a biblical term. I am glad you are trying to use science in your arguments but they'll be more credible [and easier to understand- all mammels could be called a 'kind'] if you use the correct terminology. The word is too vague and interpritive where as 'species' and 'genome' are not.




posted on Oct, 19 2005 @ 08:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by shantyman
Somewhere I read about a theory that the Mediterranean was a valley

This occured, if I recall correctly, c.f. 5 million years ago, before it would've affected people.

Oceanic fossils found in places like Utah are commonplace. Could they be related.

This was in the cretaceous. It was called the "Western Interior Seaway".

I don't think anything more than a simple flood needs to be posited to account for the bablyonian and jewish flood legends. Or any of the flood legends.

If I won that Ebay auction on the time machine, I would've been able to find out....

The one with the historic black and white photos and cutouts of the sellers head pasted on (in colour)? That was great.



resistance
Within each "kind" lies the genetic material for a vast variety of species and types.

No it doesn't, and there is no such thing as 'kinds', heck, you even stated this yourself earlier wrt the platypus.

And because these great varieties of species or types lie within the genetic material of any one "kind," if God puts the right sperm together with the right egg, you may well now have a new type or a new species.

This really isn't saying anythign other than 'if god wants to do something, he can do it', which isn't saying much.

Likewise, Noah only needed to take "kinds" on board the ark, not every species and variety and type of that kind.

There is not enough room on the ark for every 'kind', short of saying that a mouse can represent all of mammal kind or that a frog represents all 'crawly things' kind and the like.

Why can some species mate with other species and some not?

Because of some rather basic biological properties.

After a couple generations, voila, a new "thoroughbred" breed is born. All it means is the genes of this type or breed or species are isolated out

They're merely selecting traits, similar to how nature 'naturally selects' traits and causes populations of animals to change.

[edit on 19-10-2005 by Nygdan]



posted on Oct, 19 2005 @ 10:02 AM
link   
Gravity,
Now that I know you were attempting to be humorous in you post I can see that your argument makes more sense. Being new to the board I don’t know everyone’s writing style or personality, I honestly thought you were a crackpot, thinking your sarcastic remarks were actuall conjecture, I now know better. Additionally, now that you’ve further explained your position I can see that some of my argument is moot if not ridiculous.

I’m not a scientist; I’m a Historian/Librarian, so some of the scientific jokes were lost on me. However, there are a few points that I would like to clear up.

I never stated that the flood covered the world I said:
I believe that there was some kind of global flood, not a flood to the extent that it encompassed the entire earth but to the extent that sea level rose and rivers flooded to create many local floods around the globe.

You referenced a site that discusses Hapgoods theory and the idea of the The Oronteus Finaeus Map of 1532. This is not what I was referring to. I’ve read a few books on the subject and what I was referring too is the idea that great floods and tsunamis that would occur form a crustal displacement as well as a melting of the existing polar ice caps. I know this theory has its flaws but it’s something to consider.

As to why I referenced the numerous flood stories from around the world. If you take what I said “not a flood to the extent that it encompassed the entire earth but to the extent that sea level rose and rivers flooded to create many local floods around the globe.” I was attempting to offer insight to my position that the flood was multiple small floods all over the world, not hard facts. My personal belief is that the numerous flood stories are lasting memories and oral traditions refering to the flooding that occurred during the end of the last ice age, about 12,000 years ago.


In most cases I feel that such stories are misinterpretations and embellishments of certain events. People simply want to believe that there is something behind the myths. Almost justifies why they do the things they do.


As a trained Historian and Librarian I’ve a different philosophy about this and there’s no reason to get into it. But personally I believe that stories of this nature contain some truths notwithstanding the embellishments and misinterpretations.

Here’s some evidence that shows proof of flooding in the US dated between 15,300 – 12,700 years ago:
lewis.up.edu...
iceagefloodsinstitute.org...
www.msnbc.com...

Excerpts from the Encyclopedia Britanica Vol 19 pg 864-865
Some glacial valleys, as well as large upland areas, were sites of major catastrophic floods that resulted form the sudden drainage of proglacial and subglacail lakes. The largest and best know floods of this type occurred in the Channeled Scabland of the Columbia Plateau region in eastern Washington state….Sudden failure of the ice dam released over 2,000 kilometers kilometers of water, which flooded westward and southward…..

If it happened during the last ice age in the US it’s logical to think it happened in Europe too.

Excerpts from the Encyclopedia Britanica Vol 19 pg 864-865
During the Anglian-Elsterian glaciations in Europe a large ice-dammed lake formed in the North Sea, and large over flows from it initiated cutting of the Dover Straits.

www.kilda.org.uk...

Now I’m not saying the time frames necessarily line up with Noah, but I don’t actually believe in the flood story as written so there’s no reason to argue the time frame, in this discussion. You also asked me “if there was a sudden global flood, where did the water come from?” Glaciers and ice dams. See above evidence.



Illogical thinking? What do you mean? You haven’t shown that there was an arc? So who’s zooming who?

I was never trying to prove there was an arc, as I’ve stated I don’t believe there was an arc.

I believe the story of the flood is an allegory, a story meant to teach us something, not convey fact.


I have to say I always get my affect and effects mixed up, I actually meant to delete that in my post cuz I didn’t want to come across as a jerk, my bad.

I did have a question for you, you stated that floods could lead to volcanic eruptions, I did a quick search, as I don’t have as much time as I’d like right now. Where did you find information that supports the theory that floods would cause eruptions? I found this article
vulcan.wr.usgs.gov...
from the USGS dated 1993 so it could be outdated, that states:
“In the late 1800's, for example, one of the first geologists to visit the island of Hawaii, J.D. Dana, speculated that rainfall influenced the occurrence of eruptions there. In the early 1900's, volcanologists suggested that some eruptions from Mount Lassen, Calif., were caused by the infiltration of snowmelt into the volcano's hot summit. Most such associations have not been provable because of lack of information; others have been dismissed after careful evaluation of the evidence.”

Not being an ass I’m really curious.

It would seem to me that both of us agree there was no flood, at least in the biblical sense, we just be have different reasons for our beliefs.All in all I never stated, or tried to prove, there was an arc; you claimed I did, As much as I was confused by some of you points, you seemed to be confused with some of mine. I’m not a scientist as I’ve stated, so my ignorance is not a sign of stupidity it just ignorance which led to an illogical conclusion.


I was doing more research on volcanic effects on the atmosphere. You state in you position that volcanic activity on a grand scale would increase global temperatures but how do you expain Volcanic Winter and the Toba Catastrophe theory that states after the eruption of the Toba Caldara the global temperature decreased by 3-3.5C.

www.sciencedaily.com.../releases/1998/09/980908074159.htm

www.ezgeography.com...

[edit on 19-10-2005 by MrMysterious]



posted on Oct, 20 2005 @ 06:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by FatherLukeDuke
Anyway, just to correct you: insects do not breathe. This is a lie propogated by evolutionaryaryaryists and Darwinians. Insects have Intelligent Respiration (IR, coming to a school near you), that is God provides all of their metabolic reactions.


At first I was skeptical of this "Intelligent Respiration", and decided to scientifically test it. I collected a variety of insects and put them in a glass jar. I sealed the jar and left a little hole for me to pour water into. I completely filled the jar, and waited patiently for any reaction.

At first the insects were floating on top of the water. All of a sudden the laws of buoancy seemed to vanish, and the insects dropped to the bottom. After 2-3 minutes the insects somehow learnt to swim, and were parading in the glass jar, as if they were in the open field.

I'm sure that if I had provided them with enough food (they ate themselves after a while) they could have lived for 40 nights! Skeptical? Try it out yourself!



posted on Oct, 20 2005 @ 09:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by AkashicWanderer

Originally posted by FatherLukeDuke
Anyway, just to correct you: insects do not breathe. This is a lie propogated by evolutionaryaryaryists and Darwinians. Insects have Intelligent Respiration (IR, coming to a school near you), that is God provides all of their metabolic reactions.


At first I was skeptical of this "Intelligent Respiration", and decided to scientifically test it.


Actually, just because they don't breathe as you and I, doesn't mean they don't breathe.
IR seems to me to be some sort of PC phrase used to debunk science



Scientists have used X-ray video to study how insects breathe.

Unlike humans, which have lungs and blood to push oxygen to vital organs, an insect sends air directly around its body via a set of internal pipes running from holes in its external skeleton.

news.bbc.co.uk...

[edit on 20-10-2005 by DontTreadOnMe]



posted on Oct, 21 2005 @ 07:46 PM
link   
MrMysterious

You make a reasonable response very difficult. You are asking me to prove true what I was saying was false. At the same time you are giving me incorrect answers/solutions that while based on facts are not answers. You have misinterpreted your information. As you have misinterpreted what I was saying. The points I made about Noah arc are reasons that the event(s) did not happen.

First off we are in a form titled “The flood legend” so any time you make reference to “the great flood” or a global flood you are locked in to it being just as the papyrus fables indicate. Which is the story of Noah and a flood covering the entire globe all at once. This is a complete flood covering all dry land for a year. This is the story that I was showing as false.

Secondly I am unclear about the following statement:
Quote
“….but to the extent that sea level rose and rivers flooded to create many local floods around the globe. “


If the sea level rose (I’m assuming you also mean oceans) then the coastlines at the time would recede inland. This would not cause rivers to flood. It would cause their outlets to be moved further inland, as there would be less land to traverse before reaching the seas. It would not back rivers up to cause flooding as the slope of the land would still be the same and the source of their water would still be the same. This would not be “many local floods” but a worldwide decrease in dry land, like a very high tide every where at once. But there is a problem with this. Namely what height was the sea waters at before the levels rose, from what level did they start and what level did they end? The amount of water on the planet is for all intensive purposes static. When glaciers form they are reducing the amount of water in the oceans and the seas. When the glaciers melt or fall into the water they are increasing the level again. So without a reference point there really is no flood around the globe just a varying sea level.

About your next reference of Hapgood
Quote
“…I was referring too is the idea that great floods and tsunamis that would occur form a crustal displacement as well as a melting of the existing polar ice caps.”

Unfortunately you are referring to a hypothesis of Hapggod’s, which he latter withdrew. He revised his position several times to correlate with the basic theories of the ice ages. At first he believed that the earth was unbalance by the weight of ice caps (this he latter saw as incorrect) I like the following site as it mentions the PIRI RE'IS map (an excellent topic in itself).

www.crawford2000.co.uk...

But what Hapgood concluded was that the platonic movements took place at a very slow rate. This we know and currently measure at a regular rate. An example of this regular movement is the appearance of the Hawaiian Islands over 4 million years as a result of the tectonic movement of the plates. He also indicated that the poles shifted back and forth about 40 degrees over a »40,000-year period. Also supported by others.
www.poleshiftprepare.com...
culter.colorado.edu...


But this does not indicate a sudden global flood nor tsunamis. His work simply correlates with the known principles of the ice ages. I don’t know who to give credit to but I have doubts about Hapgood.
culter.colorado.edu...
en.wikipedia.org...

Quote
“You referenced a site that discusses Hapgoods theory and the idea of the The Oronteus Finaeus Map of 1532. This is not what I was referring to.”
www.talkorigins.org...

The reason I reference this is because of the value you appear give Hapgoods findings. He started off with some very incorrect ideas, which you seam to have latched onto and he latter recanted. Crustal displacements are generally slow and if they do happen in the oceans or seas they do not commonly produce tsunamis. But when the do produce tsunamis they result in brief inrushes of water which recede just as fast. So while they may produce coastal floods they are very short coastline floods, not world floods. See Sri Lanka. Additionally, with the flood at Sri Lanka there was no additional water. The water was displaced from a depression in the sea. The water had to come from somewhere that already had water. This is how the tides of the world work. When one side of the globe has high tide the other side has low tide, no additional water, just displacement.


Quote
“…that sea level rose and rivers flooded….My personal belief is that the numerous flood stories are lasting memories and oral traditions refering to the flooding that occurred during the end of the last ice age, about 12,000 years ago.”

I am unclear as to how you came to this conclusion. The numerous flood stories I agree are from oral traditions.www.talkorigins.org...

The question I have is how do you know that they are not all embellishments from the same Mesopotamian flood? As oral stories travel and change with time it is hard know which came first and from where. But I do like the idea that they could have originated from ice age floods. This is additional information, which casts doubts on the Noah stories. Although the time of the ice age floods is about 12,000 years ago and the Noah flood is about 6000 to 4000 years ago.
As the Ice Ages ended (as the temperature rose again) the melting of the ice would be slow and the Missoula ice dam would then break. Similar to the way ice in a pitcher of water clogs the water you are pouring unless you break it free. It then clogs again with new ice. This is very logical and supported by your references but I think this one is a little clearer;
vulcan.wr.usgs.gov...
Quote
“…that sea level rose and rivers flooded”

The question here is, from where did the sea levels rise from? I don’t think they were at their current position during the ice ages. The ice that had formed was from the water that used to be in the oceans and seas. The water evaporated to the sky, the sky rained and snowed the water onto the glaciers making them bigger and more massive during the building of the ice age. So the oceans and seas would have been lower during the ice ages as the water was displaced from the seas and frozen on land.

Quote
“Here’s some evidence that shows proof of flooding in the US dated between 15,300 – 12,700 years ago:
lewis.up.edu...
iceagefloodsinstitute.org...
www.msnbc.com...

These references are not supportive of “proof of flooding in the US” they are all from the same location, the pacific northwestern U.S. This is only one repetitive flood in one area not “…many local floods around the globe” Additionally, there are plenty more descriptive sites providing much better information.
vulcan.wr.usgs.gov...
imnh.isu.edu...
www.glaciallakemissoula.org...

I’m not discrediting the information, just your conclusion in response to “if there was a sudden global flood, where did the water come from?”. The information you site as well as the additional references I provided indicate quite clearly that there was no sudden great flood that would have effected the world sea levels, because there is no source for such water, which is the point I was making. You have not shown “many floods”.

Quote
“Now I’m not saying the time frames necessarily line up with Noah, but I don’t actually believe in the flood story as written so there’s no reason to argue the time frame, in this discussion. You also asked me “if there was a sudden global flood, where did the water come from?” Glaciers and ice dams. See above evidence. “

These floods are the result of an ice dam forming and breaking and forming again at different times as a result of slowly leaving the ice ages(global warming). The Ice Ages are cyclic and will happen again within the next 30,000 years.

But the volume of these repetitive floods is small in comparison to the volume of the oceans and seas. 500 cubic miles of water would have little effect on the global ocean levels. This volume is just 0.00015% of the volume of the world oceans. (332,500,000 cubic miles in the oceans of the world). So again no world flood or global rise in the water levels. You have not provided any answer to refute the point I was making, that there is no place for water to come from to flood the world. (Unless you are saying that the polar ice caps have completely melted which would kill everyone by the heat doing the melting so that is a moot idea. Additionally the Ice Caps have been there for millions of years, not melted)

Please stick with one story/belief. In the following quote you stated “…therefore yes arc”
You also stated “…your illogical thinking”

Quote
“Wrong conclusion, the arc was built before the flood. Your own argument proves your illogical thinking. Even if 1-11 were true there would still be an arc. The store states that God alerted Noah before the rains! Noah build arc then 1-11 happens, therefore yes arc.”
Now you are contradicting yourself back and forth. ”…therefore yes arc”…”don’t believe… arc.”

Quote
quote: Illogical thinking? What do you mean? You haven’t shown that there was an arc? So who’s zooming who?

”I was never trying to prove there was an arc, as I’ve stated I don’t believe there was an arc. “

Then why are you trying to show me illogical by stating “…God alerted Noah before the rains… therefore yes arc” if you don’t believe there was an arc?

And you say that I have illogical thinking? Hum


I am providing reasoning based on the physical sciences that the story is a fable. You seamed fixed on trying to prove me wrong by sighting fables that you don’t believe. How does that make sense?


Quote
“I did have a question for you, you stated that floods could lead to volcanic eruptions, I did a quick search, as I don’t have as much time as I’d like right now. Where did you find information that supports the theory that floods would cause eruptions? I found this article”

This is not a theory it is someone else’s hypothesis, which I am using to show that the biblical story if Noah and the arc is untrue. You stated that you know what constitutes good research. But you did not look at the reference I gave it my previous post.
www.answersingenesis.org...

From this misleading site;
“During Noah’s Flood much of the water came from inside the earth. Genesis 7:11 records that the fountains of the deep broke open. If the earth opened, this would probably have involved much volcanic activity as well. Even today up to 90% of what comes out of volcanoes is water. Furthermore, in the last two decades many springs have been discovered issuing forth prodigious amounts of hot (350°C) salty water from deep-seated cracks and vents in volcanic rift zones on the ocean floor.29 Such a global upheaval as Noah’s Flood would have been catastrophic, for all the mountains on the earth’s surface were covered with water (Genesis 7:18–23) and the earth’s crust was broken up by earthquakes and volcanoes. The erosion and debris produced would have been phenomenal.”

Since I am showing the falsehood of the story all parts of the story are relevant to the falsehood. Notice it mentions 350°C water (660°F).

Quote
“All in all I never stated,… there was an arc”

Aah, yes you did
“…there would still be an arc…” and “…therefore yes arc”

Of course I’m confused you are inconsistent.


Quote
“I did have a question for you, you stated that floods could lead to volcanic eruptions,”

NO I did not say that, I said “a great flood” meaning one global flood as in the context of this board. “The Flood Legend” Again this is part of the story I am saying is a fable.
But there is some understanding as to how volcanic eruptions could happen if there actually could be a global flood and that is what I have stated. Purely logic.

I said
“A great flood would cause sudden cooling of the earths surface causing it to contract and squeeze out some of the molten lava (volcanoes).”

This is logical because the mass of the earth must remain constant to stay in orbit, no new or additional water. If this water were spontaneously formed from hydrogen and oxygen it would require immense heat and use up the oxygen. If this water came from beneath the ground then the falling land would replace the space it came from. Falling land would create tremendous pressures bellow the tectonic plates and thus cause volcanic activity. There is much more to this but I don’t want to mislead you any further.


Quote
“…J.D. Dana, speculated that rainfall influenced the occurrence of eruptions…”

The Noah story has been mistranslated many times. The story is of a “Great Deluge” the majority of the water came across the ground not down from the sky. The rain was a secondary effect to the whole great flood story. (keep in mind this would cause 100% humidity for the entire time. Everyone’s lungs would fill up with water and that typically causes pneumonia)

Quote
“As much as I was confused by some of you points, you seemed to be confused with some of mine.”

Confused, your points are born out of misreading your own references and not understanding/reading the references I gave. :shk:

Quote
“…we just be have different reasons for our beliefs…”

This has little to do with beliefs by you or me this has to do with understanding the physical science that refute the papyrus fables.

Quote
“I was doing more research on volcanic effects on the atmosphere. You state in you position that volcanic activity on a grand scale would increase global temperatures but how do you expain Volcanic Winter and the Toba Catastrophe theory that states after the eruption of the Toba Caldara the global temperature decreased by 3-3.5C.”

Another example of your misreading the information. It states that it reduces the “average global temperatures by 3 to 3.5 “ and Wikipedia said that it accelerated “…the glacial shift that already was going on” In other words it speed up the ice age that was in progress.
en.wikipedia.org...

Additionally, the story I am refuting is that it was a global flood accompanied by volcanic activity. From the answersingenesis site the volcanism is combined with the vast global covering of water. Multiple water covered volcanic eruptions. This would turn the sulfur emissions into sulfuric acid. (Which didn’t happen, you are asking me to explain a story that I was saying couldn’t happen) The story indicates the floodwater from below was hot 350°C water (660°F). Volcanic eruptions involve molten rock, which is hot. Volcanic irruptions involve super heated pyroclastic flows, which are hot.


The Toba Volcano was on dry land and much larger then most known volcanoes. It is suspected to have had a plume of over 30 miles in height. This would place the dust in the stratosphere. This makes sense, because for the dust from one volcano to travel around the globe it would have to get into this part of our atmosphere.

The upper portion of stratosphere is where ozone layer resides. If the dust was there then yes it would contribute to a global reduction in temperature because it would be there blocking the sun for such a long time (several months). But most volcanoes do not have plumes that get any higher then the troposphere. Plumes from volcanoes that only reach this area of our atmosphere do not send a dust covering around the world. The dust settles in a few days or weeks. The Toba volcano is one of the rare super-volcanoes. Its massive explosion cannot be matched by any other known volcano. Additionally, it happened 70 million years ago when the earth oxygen levels were 30%.
www.cotf.edu...


But this is very different from water born volcanoes as the Noah story is talking about. A water born volcano would not put as much ash and dust into the atmosphere. It would not block out the sunlight for several months at a time as the effects would remain relatively low and local in the troposphere. But the volcanoes in the Noah story, which I was showing did not happen, would have killed the planet because it is inferred to be global volcanic activity.

Please carefully read this book; :bash:
Peter D. Ward and Donald Brownlee
Rare Earth: Why Complex Life is Uncommon in the Universe
It will answer all of your geological issues.

Have a nice day



www.talkorigins.org...



posted on Oct, 22 2005 @ 12:41 AM
link   
Just a few responses to your reply.


You make a reasonable response very difficult. You are asking me to prove true what I was saying was false.

In my last post I didn’t ask you to do anything other then provide me with sources for the theories and hypothesis you were discussing.



At the same time you are giving me incorrect answers/solutions that while based on facts are not answers. You have misinterpreted your information. As you have misinterpreted what I was saying.

I wouldn’t say my interpretations are incorrect, but I will concede that I misinterpreted what you were saying, which I already sated in my last post.


The points I made about Noah arc are reasons that the event(s) did not happen.

The problem here is that your points 1-11 are all concerning the flood, not the arc. I was mealy pointing out that just because you claim you can prove there was no flood, does not mean there was no arc. As I may not have clarly stated, there could have been an arc that survived a local flood that was embellished to a global flood.



I am unclear about the following statement:
Quote
“….but to the extent that sea level rose and rivers flooded to create many local floods around the globe. “

What’s not to understand? Why not look at what I said instead of taking part of it out of context.

As to why I referenced the numerous flood stories from around the world. If you take what I said “not a flood to the extent that it encompassed the entire earth but to the extent that sea level rose and rivers flooded to create many local floods around the globe.” I was attempting to offer insight to my position that the flood was multiple small floods all over the world

You had asked why I was referencing other flood stories, as I said, I was attempting to offer insight to my position that the flood referenced in the bible was not a flood that actually cover all the land, but multiple small floods that happened in roughly the same time period around the world.




If the sea level rose (I’m assuming you also mean oceans)


From dictionary.com

sea level
n. Abbr. SL
The level of the ocean's surface, especially the level halfway between mean high and low tide, used as a standard in reckoning land elevation or sea depths.

What an astute observation you made!


then the coastlines at the time would recede inland. This would not cause rivers to flood.

It would if the water that raised sea level came from glaciers that were trapped on land and in mountains. Water always seeks the lowest level. Are you suggesting that the water from the mountains just jumped up and landed in the oceans? That it didn’t run down hill in rivers or create new rivers? There’s so much evidence proving the rapid creations gorges and canyons from melting glaciers it would be an insult to me and you for me to have to dig them up for you to look at.


This would not be “many local floods” but a worldwide decrease in dry land, like a very high tide every where at once. But there is a problem with this. Namely what height was the sea waters at before the levels rose, from what level did they start and what level did they end? The amount of water on the planet is for all intensive purposes static. When glaciers form they are reducing the amount of water in the oceans and the seas. When the glaciers melt or fall into the water they are increasing the level again. So without a reference point there really is no flood around the globe just a varying sea level.

Introducing the: The sedimentary record.

en.wikipedia.org...

Pleaes note two specific points

During the previous interglacial about 120,000 years ago, sea level was for a short time about 6 m higher than today


There are also Pleistocene coral reefs left stranded about 3 meters above today's sea level along the southwestern coastline of West Caicos Island in the British West Indies.

Now is it really that difficult to see; if before the ice age sea leve (and yes I mean the level of the ocean) was about what it is today, 11,021 m as per www.nodc.noaa.gov... and during the ice age sea level dropped as glaciers grew, that the water that disappeared form the ocean ended up in the glaciers?


About your next reference of Hapgood

You right on about this, I was wrong. I’ve read three books on the subject that never spoke of his retraction.




“…that sea level rose and rivers flooded….My personal belief is that the numerous flood stories are lasting memories and oral traditions refering to the flooding that occurred during the end of the last ice age, about 12,000 years ago.”

I am unclear as to how you came to this conclusion. The numerous flood stories I agree are from oral traditions.www.talkorigins.org...
The question I have is how do you know that they are not all embellishments from the same Mesopotamian flood?


www.talkorigins.org... Just count the number of stories, I stopped counting in the 150s. There are hundreds of flood stories from around the world and as much as I really do want to believe that there was significant and sustained pre-Columbian transatlantic contact the evidence is just not there. So unless you can prove to me that the author of Genesis passed his story on to the Hopi Indians of America, I just can’t believe that every single retelling of the flood ledged is based upon the Gilgamesh Epic; which happens to be the very first mention of a global flood.
BTW you keep saying the flood was 6,000 ago. I’ve read the flood story and have never see a date mentioned in the Bible.

As oral stories travel and change with time it is hard know which came first and from where. But I do like the idea that they could have originated from ice age floods. This is additional information, which casts doubts on the Noah stories. Although the time of the ice age floods is about 12,000 years ago and the Noah flood is about 6000 to 4000 years ago.

Holy crap, are we in agreement? I see some hope for us (ie you and I) Gravity, I see some hope.



“…that sea level rose and rivers flooded”
The question here is, from where did the sea levels rise from? I don’t think they were at their current position during the ice ages. The ice that had formed was from the water that used to be in the oceans and seas. The water evaporated to the sky, the sky rained and snowed the water onto the glaciers making them bigger and more massive during the building of the ice age. So the oceans and seas would have been lower during the ice ages as the water was displaced from the seas and frozen on land.

Please refer to the sedimentary record, once again.


I’m not discrediting the information, just your conclusion in response to “if there was a sudden global flood, where did the water come from?”. The information you site as well as the additional references I provided indicate quite clearly that there was no sudden great flood that would have effected the world sea levels, because there is no source for such water, which is the point I was making. You have not shown “many floods”.

So I showed multiple sources for a flood in the Pacific North West and a few pertaining to a flood around the North Sea. Would you like more? I can fill a book with examples if I had the time, I was using convenient and readily accessible examples. If you prefer to discuss this particular area I’d be happy to else where.


These floods are the result of an ice dam forming and breaking and forming again at different times as a result of slowly leaving the ice ages(global warming). The Ice Ages are cyclic and will happen again within the next 30,000 years.

There was nothing slow about it

Excerpts from the Encyclopedia Britanica Vol 19 pg 864-865
Some glacial valleys, as well as large upland areas, were sites of major catastrophic floods that resulted form the sudden drainage of proglacial and subglacail lakes. The largest and best know floods of this type occurred in the Channeled Scabland of the Columbia Plateau region in eastern Washington state….Sudden failure of the ice dam released over 2,000 kilometers kilometers of water, which flooded westward and southward…..



But the volume of these repetitive floods is small in comparison to the volume of the oceans and seas. 500 cubic miles of water would have little effect on the global ocean levels. This volume is just 0.00015% of the volume of the world oceans. (332,500,000 cubic miles in the oceans of the world).

No one ever said that all the ice melted at once.

So again no world flood or global rise in the water levels. You have not provided any answer to refute the point I was making, that there is no place for water to come from to flood the world. (Unless you are saying that the polar ice caps have completely melted which would kill everyone by the heat doing the melting so that is a moot idea. Additionally the Ice Caps have been there for millions of years, not melted)

You really missed the whole point.



Please stick with one story/belief. In the following quote you stated “…therefore yes arc”
You also stated “…your illogical thinking”

I have been sticking to my original thinking, here’s what you said:

Here’s why there could not have been any global flood;
1) Half of the oxygen comes from living vegetation.

*SNIP*
11) All creatures needing oxygen to breath would be dead and poached. In the water or on land all dead.

12) No arc.

What I’ve been trying to say, and have not stated till right now (my bad) is that you can not disprove the existence of the arc because you can prove the flood never happened.
There could have been an arc and no flood!
There for what I said earlier may not have been clear but it’s the same thing I stated in the original post. I may not have presented my argument very clearly but I’ve gotten there none the less.



“Wrong conclusion, the arc was built before the flood. Your own argument proves your illogical thinking. Even if 1-11 were true there would still be an arc. The store states that God alerted Noah before the rains! Noah build arc then 1-11 happens, therefore yes arc.”

Now to address another aspect of what you’re trying to say. Just because I don’t believe the arc actually existed does not mean that I agree with you argument, I was just showing that you can not disprove the arc by disproving a global flood.



Then why are you trying to show me illogical by stating “…God alerted Noah before the rains… therefore yes arc” if you don’t believe there was an arc?

Because the argument you presented was that because no flood, no arc. This is not necessarily true. It’s impossible to disprove the arc because there was no world wide flood. What if the story is just an embellishment of another ledged? And that flood was just a local flood just as the Nile reportedly flooded every year in ancient Egypt, and some guy named Noah built a boat because he knew the river was going to flood this year. Now take it one step further, Noah builds his boat, gathers his family and livestock and floats down river during the flood and comes aground and starts a new life. In this scenario there is no world wide flood but the “arc” was built. Now add 4,000 years to that legend.




I am providing reasoning based on the physical sciences that the story is a fable.

I interpreted what you wrote as attempting to disprove the flood, as I’ve stated disproving the flood does not disprove the arc.


Quote
“I did have a question for you, you stated that floods could lead to volcanic eruptions, I did a quick search, as I don’t have as much time as I’d like right now. Where did you find information that supports the theory that floods would cause eruptions? I found this article”
www.answersingenesis.org...

Ok, my reference was from the USGS and yours is from answeringgenesis. Do I need to really explain how to select appropriate sources? You’re in over you head, I’ve been doing this for 10 years.
BTW this is all I’ve read on Answering Genesis.org

Our message
Answers in Genesis is an apologetics (i.e., Christianity-defending) ministry, dedicated to enabling Christians to defend their faith, and to proclaim the gospel of Jesus Christ effectively. We focus particularly on providing answers to questions surrounding the book of Genesis, as it is the most-attacked book of the Bible. We also desire to train others to develop a biblical worldview, and seek to expose the bankruptcy of evolutionary ideas, and its bedfellow, a "millions of years old" earth (and even older universe).
AiG teaches that "facts" don't speak for themselves, but must be interpreted. That is, there aren’t separate sets of "evidences" for evolution and creation—we all deal with the same evidence (we all live on the same earth, have the same fossils, observe the same animals, etc.). The difference lies in how we interpret what we study. The Bible—the "history book of the universe"—provides a reliable, eye-witness account of the beginning of all things, and can be trusted to tell the truth in all areas it touches on. Therefore, we are able to use it to help us make sense of this present world. When properly understood, the "evidence" confirms the biblical account.

Can we say biased and agenda pushing. I feel that we defiantly agree on this point.



“All in all I never stated,… there was an arc”

Aah, yes you did “…there would still be an arc…” and “…therefore yes arc”

Got me there, however I’ve stated in three posts now that I don’t have to believe in the arc to find your argument’s conclusion misguieded.


Of course I’m confused you are inconsistent.

I can see why you said that.


[Quote]
“I did have a question for you, you stated that floods could lead to volcanic eruptions,”

NO I did not say that, I said “a great flood” meaning one global flood as in the context of this board. “The Flood Legend” Again this is part of the story I am saying is a fable.
But there is some understanding as to how volcanic eruptions could happen if there actually could be a global flood and that is what I have stated. Purely logic.
I was really just tying to find the source for your conjecture. If it’s just “logical’ that volcanoes would erupt because the temperature of the land decreased to the point of shrinking the earth’s crust, therefore causing volcanoes, why would my question of why there’s no coloration between ice ages and volcanic activity seem so off? Ice is cold, in fact ice is colder then water. The whole earth wasn’t covered in ice but why didn’t this “logical” phenomenon happened in areas that were?


I said
“A great flood would cause sudden cooling of the earths surface causing it to contract and squeeze out some of the molten lava (volcanoes).”

Again, is this your theory or someone else’s’? I’ve asked for documentation of this theory so that I may read it and you’ve not provided it.


This is logical because the mass of the earth must remain constant to stay in orbit, no new or additional water. If this water were spontaneously formed from hydrogen and oxygen it would require immense heat and use up the oxygen. If this water came from beneath the ground then the falling land would replace the space it came from. Falling land would create tremendous pressures bellow the tectonic plates and thus cause volcanic activity. There is much more to this but I don’t want to mislead you any further.

What’s logical, the water was always there. It stared in the ocean, became ice, then returned to the ocean. No magical water was created from hydrogen and oxygen.



“…J.D. Dana, speculated that rainfall influenced the occurrence of eruptions…”

According to the USGS article I sited this is neither proven nor disproved.


The Noah story has been mistranslated many times. The story is of a “Great Deluge” the majority of the water came across the ground not down from the sky. The rain was a secondary effect to the whole great flood story. (keep in mind this would cause 100% humidity for the entire time. Everyone’s lungs would fill up with water and that typically causes pneumonia)

We get 100% humidity in the North East all the time. Everyone’s lungs would fill up with water because of 100% humidity. This is news to me and I would love to see some references to this.




“I was doing more research on volcanic effects on the atmosphere. You state in you position that volcanic activity on a grand scale would increase global temperatures but how do you explain Volcanic Winter and the Toba Catastrophe theory that states after the eruption of the Toba Caldara the global temperature decreased by 3-3.5C.”

Another example of your misreading the information. It states that it reduces the “average global temperatures by 3 to 3.5 “ and Wikipedia said that it accelerated “…the glacial shift that already was going on” In other words it speed up the ice age that was in progress.
en.wikipedia.org...

Incorrect, what is stated in the Toba Catastrophe theory is that after the eruption of Toba the average globa temperature decressed by 3-3.5 degrees C and

Remarkably, the eruption almost caused an instant Ice Age on Earth by accelerating the glacial shift that already was going on, therefore causing massive population reduction among animals and human beings on Earth.

You state that the eruptions of volcanos raise the temperautre of the earh, the atmosphere and the oceans but you’re mistaken.
Read this article:
www.giss.nasa.gov...
It clearly states:

In the climate model, both the reduced output from the sun and the increased amount of volcanic aerosols (fine particles which reflect sunlight away from the Earth and which are injected into the stratosphere by volcanic eruptions) contribute a sizeable amount to the Northern Hemisphere cooling seen in temperature reconstructions. Their relative importance depends upon uncertain estimates of exactly how much each changed relative to a century later.

NASA is directly stating that during the 17th and 18th century the:

The late 17th century was one of the coldest parts of the period known as the "Little Ice Age", when hemispheric average temperatures dropped by a few tenths of a degree. Both reduced solar output and numerous large volcanic eruptions could have contributed to the hemisphere-wide cooling.

This is NASA, they can put people on the Moon, I’m inclined to believe NASA and the USGS over your position about volcanic activity and increased temperatures.
I’ve just spent 2 hours on this and I’m beat.
Thanks for Playing!


mod edit: attempt to cut down excessive quoting in this post,
Please try to keep quotes length to a minimum




[edit on 25-10-2005 by DontTreadOnMe]



posted on Oct, 24 2005 @ 10:46 PM
link   
MrMysterious

Wow, You just don’t get it! You are still giving argument about different times and places that don’t correlate. The earth is dynamic. Events that happen at one period of time do not necessarily mean that it happen that way every time. It is not possible for me to explain the hypothesis I present to if you are going to associate completely different events as the same cause and effect. Your arguments are not applicable to the specific points. The topic is the flood legend of Noah. I do not disagree with the information you are giving me, it is correct and accurate (accept Hapgood‘s). I strongly disagree with how you interpret it. The workings of the earth and its geological activities are a very big subject. I can’t foresee how you might misuse different events and conditions as rebuttals.

The earth and its historical activity can be considered an evolutionary change. It in and of itself has gone from a molten planet to one that has become habitable to allow the evolution of life. Beneath its crustal surface the earth is still molten.


Yes, my points were to refute the possibility of the flood. But the reason the boat is called “the arc” is because of the flood legend. Is there any other context in which you would use the term “arc” when referring to a boat that wasn’t from this legendary story?


Yes there were floods from the ending of the ice ages. There is no indication that “many” were large enough or significant enough 6000 years ago to be confused with a global flood. If the story infers a global type flood with a life saving boat and other similarities then it is highly likely to be from the same original story. The conditions for the Pacific Northwest floods were during the last ice age about 12,000 ago, as you pointed out. The Missoula floods are the largest and fastest of this type of sudden glacier flow, white water rapids. This does not mean that all or even many glacier flows are like this. Typical glacier flow is very slow, on the order of lees them 30 cm/day. www.geo.unizh.ch...
Now you are referencing a higher sea level that happened 120,000 years ago. The topographical surface of the earth would be very different in those two time periods. The temperatures, the position of the earth, the atmospheric conditions, to the amount of and type of living creatures, the information for these different events do not relate to what you were referring to “extent that sea level rose and rivers flooded to create many local floods around the globe”. Notice you said, “to create many local floods” They are different events which yes I agree did happen, but at different times. They have little to do with supporting/disproving the idea of a global flood 6000 years ago that occurred in 40 days and lasted for a year, as in the context of this board and to what I have been referring. The rising sea level would not cause rivers to flood! Melting glaciers would not cause the sea to rise noticeably in 40 days. The historic people may not have been geniuses but I firmly believe that they understood the difference between rivers flooding and areas big enough to be a sea or an ocean. Certainly if they could build a boat with such primitive skills to be able to handle the dangerous rapids of an overflowing river they would know the difference.

Additionally, are you suggesting that the numerous flood stories could be from floods 120,000 years ago? Have you ever studied the origins of language? And the timeline of which language started? And the migration people to the different lands of the world? Of course not. Gilgamesh just happens to be the first written story of a flood involving a life saving boat with animals; this does not make it the first story.
Just giving you a hard time about this one.

Yes I had to put in the part about sea being the same as ocean level. I can’t be sure how much you understand, (For it seams you don’t understand much about these topics you need a reference to know that volcanoes are hot) so some points I must make clear. Sorry.

Quote
“Are you suggesting that the water from the mountains just jumped up and landed in the oceans? That it didn’t run down hill in rivers or create new rivers? There’s so much evidence proving the rapid creations gorges and canyons from melting glaciers it would be an insult to me and you for me to have to dig them up for you to look at.”


No, I am say that it is far slower than you imply, on the order of centuries.
I am suggesting that the water just fell in the oceans. (I never brought up the topic of new rivers as that that is your addition.) Water in the frozen state. This is how the majority of glaciers/ice bergs that you see floating in the oceans got there. They broke away from a continental ice shelf and fell into the oceans. It is called calving. They didn’t scurry across the land and across the beach. Not all of the ice is formed on top of land such that it must cross land at high speed (frozen or liquid) to get to the oceans. Fact is that not all glaciers are on land some are above water and are called ice shelves. Hear is a question what did the Titanic hit? Also, since you have provided reference to one rapid gorge creation I can’t be certain as to whether or not you believe that all of the gorges were formed this way, because the majority of them were not. Yes, there are rapid creation gorges. This does not discount the slowly created gorges, nor does it indicate that fast ones all were associated with large outbursts or floods. (overflowing rivers yes, but I don’t see how they could be interpreted as part of the flood story) Where else in the world do we see the scablands? There is no indication that any of these glacier floods were large enough that people would interpret them to “cover all the land” they would still see land. They would still see where the glaciers broke away. Isn’t that obvious?

This is to point out that it would not be a sudden global rise in the water. The majority of glaciers move very slow 20-30 cm/day. While the leading edges of these have a tendency to break off they do not repeatedly produce Missoula type flooding. That appears to be a common ice age event that has little noticeable effects on the levels of the sea. Certainly wouldn’t be the source of the Noah fable. Perhaps an embellishment to it like the Hopi.
Keep in mind that these flood stories are about huge flood events that took place during brief moments of people’s lifetimes. Events involving living on a boat for a long period of time. The Missoula flood was fast and short. Considering the sudden erosion of the rocks it is doubtful that these stories would have involved a boat that couldn’t see land. The events you are siting that could have caused the large rise and fall of the sea levels are a much bigger time span (centuries, from your references) such that one person did not witness the whole cycle. The flood legends (that relate to this story) are stories of floods that individuals have supposedly observed, in one lifetime! In fact the legendary story took place in less than one year!
You are claiming “the flood” could have been many local floods. I am pointing out that many local floods at different time and different places would not comprise the numerous similar flood stories involving a life (humans and animals) saving arc floating for long durations as the result of instructions from god.

The levels of the seas as I was pointing out did not raise or fall suddenly. (certainly not in 40 days & nights) This is how I interpreted your statement “that sea level rose and rivers flooded to create many local floods around the globe” In that context I don’t understand why you site this as evidence of global floods. To me it is just a slow change in the sea levels. As you references show, in say 40,000 years as the cycles of the ice ages or 120,000 years ago as you also referenced. (40,000 year change in sea level I see as slow) Certainly very different from the legendary flood, where the level change was a few thousand feet in 40 days. You can pick on the details of the flood stories all you want. That doesn’t invalidate my any of my points.
It is the amazing similarities of these stories in conjunction with the knowledge of the culture and migration of the people, which indicate that they most likely originated from the same ancient tale. Some of the people of New Orleans feel that their whole world was flooded.


The Hopi Indians didn’t occupy this land until 6000 years after the legend started. They migrated from the third world, Mexico and the surrounding areas. The language of the Hopi Indians is Uto-Aztecan, which indicates that it has an Olmec culture. The ecology of the Olmec culture is very similar to that of the ecology of the other ancient centres of civilization: Mesopotamia and the Nile valley. So it is possible that it is from the same story as they have other simlarities like pyrmids to as we know are also common in the mesopatameam region as well as Spain. Considering that the story indicates that they floated around before finding the forth world land and that they used birds to find this land there is an amazing simalirty to the noah story, the Missoula flood would not have left people floating around for a long time where they couldn’t see land. It appears that their legend could have started from the same original story, it certainly had enough time to migrate and morph.

No, I don’t want more small flood examples as you don’t understand that as the ones you already gave have no coorelation to the flood story I am talking about. I already pointed out that these floods would not raise the level of the sea to be misinterpreted as a global event 4000 to 6000 years ago. You missed that. More than once. If you actually did some research you would have found the logical location of the flood legend to be The Mediterranean and Black Sea Basins 7500 years ago.


The actual time of the global flood is insignificant (4000 , 4500, 6000, or 7000 years ago) as I as trying to show that it didn’t happen. I do not study the bible much, so I do not have my own detailed explanation. For this as well as the details of the story I use the information from the creationists web sites (Answersingenesis & IRC). They have the most intricate details about all of the biblical events.
You said that you have been studying this topic for over ten years, well have not been doing very good research!! In a ten-year study you should know very well where these numbers come from. The creationists add up the ages of each person in the chronological lineage of the bible.
If you had actually been doing your research you would have read the answersingenesis site, which indicates that the fabled flood happened 4500 years ago. “The Flood, according to biblical chronology, occurred approximately 4,500 years ago.”
If you had actually been capable of doing good research you would be telling me that the sudden flooding of the black sea is the hypothetical source of the legendary story and you would not be suggesting local floods in North America.
www.ngdc.noaa.gov...
This site talks about your idea of ice age floods, still not world wide flooding at the same time nor over period of less than one year (or 40 days as the bulk of the stories go). Here they indicate that the flood happened 6000 years ago.
www.mystae.com...
They also indicate the ending of the last ice age increased the level of the sea to its present, as I previously suggested. They also indicate the sea levels jumped in just a few centuries. Not in just a few weeks as in the flood legend. They also mention the Missoula flood, which you brought up.

news.rpi.edu...(1)
Another site indicating the source of the legendary flood happened 7500 years ago.


Yes, the sedimentary record. I am not suggesting that catastrophic local floods didn’t happen. I am suggesting that they happened as the result of different events at different times under different conditions over many years, decades, centuries, eons, as the sedimentary records show. But particular similarities are most likely from the same tale.


Quote
“No one ever said that all the ice melted at once.”

No but this is about discrediting your answer for where the sudden “global flood” waters came from. You were making a point to tell me where all the water came from. Where all the waters of the flood legend came from. So logically I thought you were referring to the same event that I was talking about. A deluge. One that covered the earth with a few thousand feet of water. Even if all of the glaciers of the world were to melt it would only raise the sea levels 70 meters or so, this very far from the story I am talking about

I believe showing that the flood did not happen as in the story, also shows that the arc did not happen. Because the definition of “the arc” as I see it is a large boat responsible for saving all of the (2 or 7 or whatever number of whatever animals, another big topic) current kinds of life from the biblical flood. So no biblical flood, no biblical arc, no any arc.

But don’t take this to mean that there wasn’t a large boat. Just that it was not an arc until it became a legendary story. I believe that the boat (from with this story manifested) was one of the larger shipping vessels of its time. Such a boat would carry grains, livestock, and possibly seafood. The Laws of Hammerabi (another great topic) predate the bulk of the biblical stories. These laws show quite clearly that there was food and livestock cultivation and trade. I believe that the boat of Noah was one of the largest of its type and that to be so large as to require investors for its construction and operation. So yes there was a boat but no, it was not the legendary “arc”.

To go further with the story, Noah’s boat was at sea at the time of a significant sea born volcanic eruption (submarine volcano). This eruption created a tsunami that carried the boat onto land. Whether it was on top of Mt. Aarart or not, I don’t know. But accompanying this tsunami was some of the lava rocks from the volcano. Research the Black Sea and the lake below it.

Quote “I’ve been doing this for 10 years.”

Doing what? Poor research? Misinterpreting? Misquoting? Misunderstanding? “You’re in over you head”
The answersingenesis is a very misleading site. They present some very good information and misuse it to support the biblical stories, as your excerpt shows. They do the best job at this then any other site. It is there version of the fabled flood event (and their details) that I am refuting. Your reference from the USGS is good but does not correlate. It is presenting information about rain causing volcanic activity. Great, so what. That is real science and I am not trying prove or disprove how rain can cause volcanic eruptions. I am showing how the answersingenesis is incorrect in their interpretation of the facts they use. They omit some significant effects that would result from the things that they suggest happened. It is these omitted details that I am using to show that they have an incorrect interpretation. If anything your reference is an attempt to support their interpretation but it does not. Rain causing volcanic activity is not the same as a deluge of water erupting from beneath the ground to cover the earth. Nor is it the same as rain covering the earth with cool water a few thousand feet deep.


This is the source of the information I am refuting. They provide the details of how the evidence supports their interpretation of the story, so dah, it is an appropriate source as it is the source. :bash:

Quote
” I was really just tying to find the source for your conjecture. If it’s just “logical’ that volcanoes would erupt because the temperature of the land decreased to the point of shrinking the earth’s crust, therefore causing volcanoes, why would my question of why there’s no coloration between ice ages and volcanic activity seem so off? Ice is cold, in fact ice is colder then water. The whole earth wasn’t covered in ice but why didn’t this “logical” phenomenon happened in areas that were?”

Ok, this can become a huge topic, which the book I keep referring to will explain. But the subject here is about a sudden global flood, a flood that covered the earth in just 40 days. A sudden flood that caused a decrease in the global temperature of the warm land all at once. The ice ages are a 40,000 year cycle. Sometimes they correlate with the 100,000 cycle of the changing earth orbit. They constitute a slow temperature change. Yes it is a fact that ice is colder than water but it is also a fact that flowing water conducts heat better then a chunk ice. It is also a fact that still water is an excellent insulator. This is why the surface water of the seas is warmer then the bottom waters, the heat on top does not conduct to the bottom. The flood story is talking about a few thousand feet of water around the earth. In a few thousand feet of water (if from rain) the bottom will be significantly colder than the top, unless it is already hot steamy water (from volcanic activity below) to start with. It all depends on whether you want to believe the floodwaters came from the sky above or from the hot earth below.


If someone pours a glass of water on you while you are out side in the cold weather you will get much colder then if they put the same amount of water in the frozen state on you. The water will displace the insulating air and remove the heat quicker because as it evaporates. The heat is pulled away as the water changes state from liquid to gas. It will cause a thermal shock, you will feel it. The chunk of ice would just hurt. If you put beer in a cooler of just ice it will not cool down as fast as beer in a cooler of just very cold water because the water comes into contact with all of the surfaces at once. Where with just ice only the points where the ice touches will get cool, as the other areas are insulated with air. Then once the part of the ice that melts becomes water it can’t move away because there is ice behind it. (One additional fact is that ice insulates the ground. It will prevent it from going below the freezing point. This is why the inside of Igloos are comparably warm to the much colder weather outside) With water there is a circulation of the warmer and cooler waters. The warm water will rise and the cool water will fall. It is this water circulation, which does the job of quick heat transfer. When you drop ice into a glass of water you quite often will hear the ice cracking as a result of a thermal shock. This is because of the amount of heat transferred from the water into the solid ice is so fast, it cracks because the outer surface of the cube is changing state (and density) from the heat and the inside of the ice is still frozen and not changing density. (this is also another very big topic see www.lsbu.ac.uk...)

So suddenly covering the earth with cool water would cool the surface and create a thermal shock, unless that water was already hot. The thermal shock will cause a similar effect as that of the ice I mentioned above, cracking crust of the earth open to expose the hot molten sublayer. But this is all besides the point. I am indicating that this event did not happen. Why didn’t this happen in area that were/are covered with ice is because the ice formed in areas that are already cold, in areas that have already contracted and because the ice formed slowly, and because these areas have a thick crust. (Have you ever noticed the ground cracking open in the cold of winter? Or the gap created between the base of your building and the ground next to it? It is this space that fills up with the winter rains and then causes a thawing of the ground which then expands and pushes water into the basement of the buildings. It pushes with such pressure it commonly causes the basement walls to crack open and then later leak from normal rainfall) The thickness of the land beneath the ice insulates the surface, from subterranean heat, to allow the ice to form. The reduced amount of sunlight getting to these areas of the earth allows the ice to form. The amount of ozone created and destroyed by the sunlight in these areas allows the ice to form. If you were to suddenly cover the earth with water you will dislodge the ice caps and cover the earth with circulating ice water (unless you are using steamy hot water). Which will cool the surface of the earth and when things cool they contract and with thermal shock they quite often break.

If you are using hot water from below pushed up as a result of volcanic activity well, then the volcanic activity came first and then the surface of the earth shrunk. Because something has to fill the space from where the water and lava came from, it would not be air. There is only the surface of the earth left so it goes down as the water and lava comes up. They call this (type of falling land as the result of a volcano) a Caldera. So if there were to be global emissions of water from global volcanic activity there would be global Calderas. Which means the land would have fallen or the earth (land) shrunk as the result of volcanic displacement. Which came first or which caused which is not the point!

Quote
“Again, is this your theory or someone else’s’? I’ve asked for documentation of this theory so that I may read it and you’ve not provided it.”

It is not theory it is physical science. You just don’t get it. :bash:
You want to read it, then try Physics 101, Geology 101, & Chemistry 101.


Why would there be documentation to something that didn’t happen because of the way things work. It is not possible to flood the world with water without numerous immense catastrophic results. That is my point!! I am not going to explain all the possible scenarios as what the catastrophic results of an impossible global flood might be. I am just pointing out one or two basic principles of the many physical sciences that would take place. It is not theory; a theory is the result of many tested and proven right hypotheses.

Quote
“We get 100% humidity in the North East all the time. Everyone’s lungs would fill up with water because of 100% humidity. This is news to me and I would love to see some references to this.”

Really? Where in the northeast do you have 100% humidity indoors? For a year? Combined with the heat of 16,000 animals and their waste?
Have you seen some of the mold growing on the walls of the homes in New Orleans? This mold grew because of the high humidity and warmth in just a few days. You must have mushrooms a mold growing everywhere in your living space.
Do you need an explanation about the bacterial growth? (gram negative) If you were to live in that you would be in bad shape in a short period of time. This is defiantly over your head but, absolute humidity 100% and temperature above 100 degrees, your body temperature at 98.6 degrees would be cooler thus, condensation forms inside and outside of you. You either drown or die as a result of the heat index. Again, more physical science.

Quote
“You state that the eruptions of volcanos raise the temperautre of the earh, the atmosphere and the oceans but you’re mistaken.
Read this article:
www.giss.nasa.gov...

Give me a break!! I did not state that!!!!! Stop omitting and twisting the information around!!!


This is what I stated “6) The ocean temperature would rise. Carbon dioxide (most of the earths CO2 is in the oceans) would be liberated out into the atmosphere. The water would heat up (from the volcanoes and green house effect) and kill the phytoplankton. “

”The ocean temperature would rise!!!”
“The water would heat up!!!”

I never said it would raise the temperature of the earth

I never said it would raise the temperature of the atmosphere


But the fact is (if you could stay with the topic of a global flood) that if you put out enough steamy hot water to flood the globe with a few thousand feet of this hot water in just 40 days that steamy hot water would raise the temperature of the lower atmosphere and the surface of the earth. The center of the earth is already hot. This is a short term effect!!! The source of the heat in this scenario is the molten rock beneath the crust, not the sun!!! You totally missed the point. The sun would not be blocked out if all the volcanic activity had to pass through water. The dust and acid would not go very high. The hot water would be leaching huge amounts of CO2 among other toxic gases. Global cooling is a long-term effect of cutting off a different source of heat. You want to test this, fill your bathtub with hot water and cover the _ Tell me how cold the bathroom is right after the tub is full.

The flood story talks about lots of volcanic activity, a cataclysmic event. Enough activity to produce the floodwaters of the fable, around the globe, from below the land in just 40 days. Volcanoes are hot!! Water coming out of the ground as a result of volcanic activity is hot. Old Faithful is putting out hot water. Imagine that there was enough Old Faithful blowning out enough hot water to cover the earth with a few thousand feet of volcanic sourced water. It would be hot. What are you missing here!!! A ten year old understands this.
Answersingenesis
“This new information may now explain ‘why massive volcanic outbursts suddenly flood[ed] hundreds of thousands of square kilometres [of land] with lava’, as observed in a number of different parts of the geological record.”

Note they are indicating that thousands of square kilometers of land was covered with lava. Lava is hot. This does not include the hundreds of thousands of square kilometers of ocean with erupting submarine volcanoes. “Massive volcanic outbursts” All part of one version of the fable

library.thinkquest.org...
“According to Baumgardner,God stretched the tectonic plates, causing the magma underneath to rise out of the ground into the ocean. This magma then ballooned out and evaporated, displacing a huge amount of water. Tidal waves and rain caused by these jets of magma were high enough and strong enough to cause all the mountains to be covered and send a boat filled with one human family and two of every known animal off on their way.”


Note that magma is hot, when it hits the water the water gets hot. Not a theory, just a fact.


www.atheists.org...
” Incidentally, if all the volcanic lava beds that we see interspersed between these sedimentary rocks were laid down during one year, the amount of heat released from that lava would have heated the water of the ocean to several thousand degrees centigrade! And so Noah's ark would have had to have been air-conditioned!”
“According to Robert A. Moore [previous citation, pp. 10-11], if all the known "fossil" lava flows had been produced during a single year, as creationists aver, the 3.65 octillion calories of heat released would have raised the temperature of the oceans by more than 2700° C”



Flood water around the globe from volcanoes around the globe. MANY THOUSANDS OF VOLCANOES!!!! Lots of lava, lots of hot pyroclastic flows, lots of steam. If these sources of heat are passed through water, well then the water gets hot!! If there was enough water to be pushed up by these volcanoes to cover the earth then the volcanoes are around the earth in a sufficient quantity to cover the globe with hot water. The globe would first be hot from all of the volcanic activity at the same time. That is called a short-term effect. Then yes it would cool down over time, no kidding. You’re a freakin’ genius.
Go stand over an active volcano and tell me how cold you get!!

volcanoes.usgs.gov...


quote:
These floods are the result of an ice dam forming and breaking and forming again at different times as a result of slowly leaving the ice ages(global warming). The Ice Ages are cyclic and will happen again within the next 30,000 years.

Quote
“There was nothing slow about it “
Really, so you are saying the ice ages are fast, that 40,000 year cycle is fast!?!?!?!???
This is what I wrote “…slowly leaving the ice age…”


I can’t hold back, your comprehension sucks! I am not mistaken, you are an id….


Quote
“No one ever said that all the ice melted at once. “
quote: So again no world flood or global rise in the water levels. You have not provided any answer to refute the point I was making, that there is no place for water to come from to flood the world. (Unless you are saying that the polar ice caps have completely melted which would kill everyone by the heat doing the melting so that is a moot idea. Additionally the Ice Caps have been there for millions of years, not melted)

”You really missed the whole point.”

Yeah, I did, the point is that you are astronomically incapable of understanding what people write. This is about a sudden global flood, what part of that don’t you comprehended? Perhaps it is the word “sudden”


Sudden- A happening without warning; unforeseen: a sudden storm.


No, no one ever said that all the ice melted at once. But you are giving me an answer to “where did all the water come from?” Which means; where did all the water to cover the earth in 40 days come from? (The topic of my points is the flood legend) So naturally I though you were answering the question. But no, you were giving out completely unrelated information. For no reason. Telling me about a glacial flood that would not raise the level of the oceans more than a millimeter.

I have repeatedly shown your misinterpretations, your misquote, your misunderstanding, and your failure to address the topic, The Legendary global flood.
You’re in over you head
You have not shown a single one of points to be even the slightest bit incorrect.
You have overwhelmingly proven you can’t understand physics

The NASA reference is great. But they are talking about a seasonal length of time combined with reduced solar energy to cause a global reduction in temperature. Yes, of course I agree with this. This is a long-term effect of blocking the sun and a reduced solar output. They mention the fact that this is a long-term reaction. You missed that. As your reference indicates the temperature change is only ½ a degree. This is because so very little of this volcanic emissions make it into the stratosphere. The Toba (super-volcano) volcanic eruption caused a 3 to 3.5 degree global drop in temperature because it put so very much into the stratosphere for several months! Yes, global cooling effect. Do you want me to believe that the area around the Toba volcano was cold at the time of the eruption? Or even a day or a week after the eruption? Once again you have not done your research and you don’t seam to understand that volcanoes occurring underwater do not have this effect!! They do not put dust and acids into the stratosphere because the water intercepts a large amount of the emissions and reduces the height to which the rest of it (dust and gases) will go. Geology 101. The rest of the dust would settle quite quickly and locally but since it is from global volcanic activity the dust would be covering worlds watered surface, and the arc.

I am talking about a sudden great deluge, ”The flood legend”. You keep missing this!!! Unless it was hot water as from the volcanic earth, It would have been cool water from the sky. (Disregarding the physical impossibilities of this.) If the water in vapor form were to condense to liquid form it would be a cooling effect. This can be observed every time it rains, the temperatures fall.
Because for water to condense it requires cooling, Physics 101.
Deep bodies of water are cool at the bottom as the sunlight only heats the surface of the water. The heat of the sun does not reach the bottom, Geology 101 & physics 101.
When things get cold they contract, Physics 101 & chemistry 101
Thus, If you cover the earth with a deluge of water from the sky the water will have a cooling effect. The lower portion of this water as it collected to cover the earth would be cooler then the top. Physics 101
The rain most likely would be coming from clouds that would block the sunlight from heating the earth during the rain. Meteorology 101
This cooler water will cause the surface of the earth to cool as it insulates it from the heat of the sun in addition to it own cooling effect, in addition to the pressure it would place directly on the lands of the earth as the barometric pressures were reduced by condensing waters leaving the skies, Meteorology 101.
Therefore, it would cause the earth to contract from a reduced temperature. Because things contract when the temperature falls. Physics 101
If the surface of the earth contracts all at once it cracks (actually it increases the tectonic movement of the plates) just like the ice cube dropping into cold water. But unlike the ice cube when the earth cracks open (or apart just like many ice cubes do as a result of thermal shock) hot gases and molten lava is allowed to escape to relieve the pressures created from the contraction.


One volcano putting enough dust in the stratosphere to block out the sun for several months will of course lower the AVERAGE temperature, over time. The active word here is “average” (the word you omitted before with your Toba reference was “average”, you change the meaning of the quote when you misquote and omit words :bash: ) temperature because the dust (and acids) despite being up high in the stratosphere blocking the sun from reaching the lower atmosphere and the surface of the earth, would not block out the sun everywhere on the planet. Some areas would still get relatively the same amount of sunlight and it would happen over time (like a 2 to 3 year period), not all at once. It would be a slowly decreasing average global temperature.

But numerous volcanoes producing a few thousand feet of hot water is heating things up, immediately. You do understand that lava is hot and that lava is molten rock +750° Celsius. coming out of volcanic eruptions. Thousands of volcanoes blowing out through the floodwaters will not put immense quantities of dust into the stratosphere! The dust would be lower, the CO2 would be rising up from the heat. The sulfur would be comining with the water to produce sulfuric acid. Global volcanic eruptions putting 750° Celsius rock into the water. You should well understand that this will heat up the water!

www.geo.ua.edu...
www.crystalinks.com...
www.nmm.ac.uk...
Even if the suns light is blocked out, that is irrelevant as in this scenario as all of the heat in the first 40 days is coming from the cataclysmic amount of volcanic activity.

You should be inclined to believe NASA and USGS as they support exactly what I am saying. Volcanoes are hot. And the cooling you keep harping on is long-term!! They don’t even study the short term as it is so blatantly obvious that volcanic eruptions are hot, but you need to study in order to understand this fact!
eobglossary.gsfc.nasa.gov...
Quote from NASA’s site
“When Kavachi’s lava reached the sea surface in 2002, the MODVOLC thermal alert system detected the emitted heat.”
Also from NASA’s site
“On June 22, 1989, the Wahaula Visitor Center in Hawaii was engulfed by a lava flow and burst into flames” You want to tell the people of Hawaii that this was the result of the cooling effect of the volcano?
volcanoes.usgs.gov...



pubs.usgs.gov...
“A large body of magma, capped by a hydrothermal system (a zone of pressurized steam and hot water), still exists beneath the caldera.”

“The active volcanic vents along the spreading mid-ocean ridges create ideal environments for the circulation of fluids rich in minerals and for ore deposition. Water as hot as 380 °C gushes out of geothermal springs along the spreading centers. The water has been heated during circulation by contact with the hot volcanic rocks forming the ridge. Deep-sea hot springs containing an abundance of dark-colored ore minerals (sulfides) of iron, copper, zinc, nickel, and other metals are called "black smokers."
pubs.usgs.gov...
“Geothermal energy can be harnessed from the Earth's natural heat associated with active volcanoes or geologically young inactive volcanoes still giving off heat at depth. Steam from high-temperature geothermal fluids can be used to drive turbines and generate electrical power, while lower temperature fluids provide hot water for space-heating purposes, heat for greenhouses and industrial uses, and hot or warm springs at resort spas. For example, geothermal heat warms more than 70 percent of the homes in Iceland, and The Geysers geothermal field in Northern California produces enough electricity to meet the power demands of San Francisco.”
In 1977, scientists discovered hot springs at a depth of 2.5 km, on the Galapagos Rift (spreading ridge) off the coast of Ecuador. This exciting discovery was not really a surprise. Since the early 1970s, scientists had predicted that hot springs (geothermal vents) should be found at the active spreading centers along the mid-oceanic ridges, where magma, at temperatures over 1,000 °C, presumably was being erupted to form new oceanic crust.
The waters around these deep-ocean hot springs, which can be as hot as 380 °C, are home to a unique ecosystem.”

Again in the context of this board “The Flood Legend” which according the answersingenesis the flood was associated with significant amounts of volcanic activity because as they are suggesting the water came from below as the result of a volcanic event. The also indicate that this happened in 40 days. An average global drop in temperature of 3 degrees does not happen in 40 days! Or a year. According to both NASA and USGS volcanoes are hot, and underwater volcanoes can produce water that is hot, 380 °C. According the park rangers at Yellowstone Park the geysers are hot water as the result of volcanic activity. If the globe was to be covered with a few thousand feet of hot steamy water for 40 straight days it would definitely be globally hot!!


en.wikipedia.org...
“Analysis of over 200 volcanic rocks and pieces of debris, such as roof tiles, suggest that the ash cloud had a temperature of 850°C when emerging from the mouth of Vesuvius. It had cooled to below 350°C by the time it reached the city. Most of the materials analyzed experienced temperatures between 240°C and 340°C. A few areas showed lower temperatures of only 180°C. It is theorized that turbulence may have mixed cool air into the ash cloud. (Cioni, et al., 2004)”

You might want to inform the Wikipedia the people of Pompeii actually died from the sudden 3 degree cooling effect of the volcano, not the pyroclastic flow. You should let NASA and USGC know this as well.


Quote
“You’re in over you head”

Are you familiar with the term “the pot calling the kettle black”?


Have a misguided day


mod edit to tone down the rhetoric

[edit on 25-10-2005 by DontTreadOnMe]



posted on Oct, 25 2005 @ 09:40 AM
link   
Well considering that you've started with the name calling I'll just call it a day as this is not what I'm here to do.



posted on Oct, 25 2005 @ 05:02 PM
link   
MrMysterious
I am very sorry I have reduced myself to such a poor position. Sometimes you just got to test the limits. In retrospect my insulting responce was very bad judgement. I am humbled by the result.


Gravity

[edit on 25-10-2005 by Gravityisatheory]



posted on Oct, 26 2005 @ 08:26 AM
link   
Since I can't U2U Gravity I'll post this here....

Gravity,
Listen, no harm no foul. Don't worry about it.

Turns out my library has that Rare Earth book. I'm going to look into it. Wasn't trying to be a jerk about the whole volcano thing, I just couldn't find info that discussed the concepts you were talking about. I truly was trying to get some resources so that I could look into if for myself.

In retrospect I see that the argument you put forth was a very strong argument in disproving the flood story as presented on Answering Genesis. However, I was speaking more generally about the flood stories as opposed to the specific story from Answering Genesis, which is probably why we couldn't see eye to eye. Let's just leave it at that.

Take it easy,
MrMysterious



posted on Nov, 1 2005 @ 06:42 PM
link   
There is proof of floods all over.... maybe not on a global scale. Funny how in Mesopotamia there is the same story as Noah but much older. It is possible that what was written really did happen.... like a small land mass...



posted on Nov, 2 2005 @ 07:01 AM
link   
Don't be be put off by name caller Mr Mysterious

Onwards and Outwards



posted on Nov, 3 2005 @ 12:01 PM
link   


The spatial distribution of large gaged floods throughout the United States shows that the locations of most of the largest flows are related to specific combinations of regional climatology, topography, and basin size. Key factors include the general northward trend of decreasing atmospheric moisture, proximity to oceanic moisture sources such as the Pacific Ocean and the Gulf of Mexico, and orientation of topographic features relative to directions of moisture flow, with the largest flows being at locations where topographically high areas are oriented perpendicular to directions of moisture flow.


I look at it this way - early civilized settlements occured near sources of water. Areas near water flood more rapidly and more often than areas removed from water sources. Logically, early civilized settlements around the globe flooded and the people of the settlements feared floods. This can be said as an objective statement.

Now I begin to speculate. Cultural fear has historically naturally lead to the spread of information on the object of the fear - including folk tales of warning. For example, a seafaring people will tell stories about fearsome sea creatures, massive storms, and whatever else is pertinent to their safety. In this way, ancient people, who were subjected to floods worldwide, observed the destructive forces of the floods and crafted legendary stories about floods as devices to both entertain and warn future generations about the hazards of flooding. These tales may have been exaggerated stories about real historical floods or completely invented floods.

Folk tales about large floods are just one example of man's propensity to focus on "catastrophism." The world being destroyed by water is a very simple and basic catastrophic story. The widespread destructive forces known to ancient man basically mirrored the 4 elements - floods, storms, fires, and earthquakes. In studying ancient stories about catastrophism, these 4 simple themes of destruction occur over and over again.

Modern man is not entirely different from ancient man in this respect, as we have added astronomical impacts and nuclear devestation to our list of catastrophic foci.

In any case, I think that it is unsound to hold that archetypal flood legends occuring worldwide is evidence of a worldwide flood.

Zip

[edit on 11/3/2005 by Zipdot]



posted on Nov, 9 2005 @ 09:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Behold FYI: Even if Noah had 120 years (43,830 days) in which to collect all these animals, it would mean he would have to collect over 45,000 animals (22,500 pairs) EACH AND EVERY DAY. It would mean he would be removing many of these animals from their natural environment, where they prey on food, and he would have to feed them for the 120 years it would take to collect the number. It is so unrealistic you have to be plain foolish to believe it happened that way. But, read the bible, and toss out the mythological teachings you get at sunday school, and then perhaps you'll see a more realistic scenario. Every portion of the bible shows a God that works thru realistic and natural means.


Don't underestimate old Noah, he did live to be 900 odd years old after all.

Well thats what it says in the Bible at least.......



.......





new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join