Evidence that supports a world wide flood in relatively recent times?

Is this new find better explained by the failure of the circular logic behind many of the foundations of modern evolutionary and geological theory and a world wide flood in relatively recent times???

www.msnbc.msn.com...

Jaden

Theres really no proof linking it to a global flood, but maybe there was a tsunami or something else in play. No way of knowing, really.

With the amount of water covering the surface of the earth, its not that hard to fathom. Really no proof of anything but the abundance of water on the earths surface And natural disasters.

reply to post by AllUrChips


I think that a growing earth is a much better explanation for changes than pangea. I also have a theory about time in relation to Einstein's theories of relativity that shows how time would have moved much slower in the past.

Jaden

Read Graham Hancock's "Underworld." The basic idea is that about 12,000 years ago we were coming off an ice age when a lot of the water was locked up in ice and the sea level was 60 feet lower than it is now. As the ice began to melt in Hudson Bay it was helf back by an ice dam that ringed the shoreline. One day the ice dam breaks, the water rushes out, and a few hours later the sea floods the coastline where all major incipient civilizations, such as in India, were located. And there you have the universal flood myth. No Noah required.

Well if the theory that there was once a water canopy surrounding this planet that protected it from severe weather is correct, the water is still "in the system" but on the ground. The idea is that God made that canopy fall.
Imagine a very different geography of the world if we reversed the split of land and water.

More than 2 million years ago

First 5 words in the article. By "relatively recent times', you made it sound like it would have been 4,000ish ago.

Anyways, with that much time, there's many explanations rooted in fact than invoking a supernatural idea to explain them.

Pyenson said the spot was once a "lagoon-like environment" and that the whales probably died between 2 million and 7 million years ago.

Going from Lagoon to dessert, over up to 7 million years, would definitely kill the marine life. Maybe smaller creatures could flee through a channel too shallow for the whales to, while they were left to die in a shrinking water mass.

~
The aren't even from the same time frame necessarily.

He said it's possible "these fossilized remains may have accumulated over a relatively long period of time."

The phenomena itself is that they are all really close to each other. That's not something a global flood would cause. The flood would probably shatter their bones and spread all the pieces of each on of them all over the planet(Or at least across a couple hundred mile radius).

So no, not evidence of a world wide flood. That would be a blatant misinterpretation of the facts.

reply to post by xxsomexpersonxx


What the hell are you talking about, I never said 4000 ish years ago or made mention of ANY supernatural occurrence???

JAden

Originally posted by Masterjaden
reply to post by xxsomexpersonxx

 

What the hell are you talking about, I never said 4000 ish years ago or made mention of ANY supernatural occurrence???

JAden

I believed you were referring to, "The Flood". Primarily, because there's nothing about, or indicating a worldwide flood in the article. Some religious folk are drastic in their attempts to find evidences for stories, even in places where there isn't any at all.

I was clarifying that if they died from a flood, it wasn't in the biblical timeline. On top of that, the idea of a Global Flood has been around for a long time without any evidences managing to back it up. Aside from "Creation Science" trying to see it where it isn't there. So, with so many possible explanations for the whales, in a small local area, it's irrational to assume it was a global flood that was otherwise unsupported. Especially when the whale fossils here don't indicate a flood at all.

By saying it's dumb to come up with a supernatural explanation, I can site the other topics that are popping up on this site. "We don't know exactly what happened to the whales, if we don't know it means we know God Did It. Via a flood, even if a flood doesn't fit the picture at all, it has to be it because we don't know what it really was." The whales don't indicate anything beyond what we already know about, so it's pointless to assume something that's completely unproven (God invoked, or even natural global flood) when answers that don't require any such existences exist.

If you take offense that I assumed you were talking about the biblical flood, I apologize. However, my points still stand.

My [half-baked?] theory:

First, you've got Earth, a planet which always had water, but at some time in the fairly recent past, got a lot more.

Second, you've got Mars, a planet which used to have water, but now has very little. In view of Velikovsky, is it possible the two planets came close enough together for Mars' water to be pulled off by Earth's gravity?

There is some evidence that a crater lake type volcano erupted and caused tsunamis that were thousands of feet high...some say that is what caused the dark ages...the enormous ash cloud that hung in the air for years.

As continents shift...and convergent and divergent boundaries form...water is most certainly going to be displaced.

It has happened for millions of years and it will continue to happen.

reply to post by Masterjaden

II Peter 3:
[3] Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts,
[4] And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation.
[5] For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water:
[6] Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished:
[7] But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.

This verse tells much about the belief of men today......Since most would rather commit all ungodly acts with out a conscience.

As many will post they will deny the fact that most of the earth at least 75% is covered in deep sedimentary rock.

Or the fact that fossils are mostly created by rapid burial, and that there are massive fossil grave yards all over the earth......Yeah a tidal wave hit Montana and killed off large animals in great numbers burying them in deep sediments.

Or the fact that there are many recent lakes that overflowed and created large canyons.

Originally posted by jerryznv
There is some evidence that a crater lake type volcano erupted and caused tsunamis that were thousands of feet high...some say that is what caused the dark ages...the enormous ash cloud that hung in the air for years.

Ice* Ages.

*clarifying*

Originally posted by ACTS 2:38
reply to post by Masterjaden

 

This verse tells much about the belief of men today......Since most would rather commit all ungodly acts with out a conscience.

So, the reason I deny a global flood, is because I want to commit ungodly acts and don't want to have a conscience?

I thought it was because of a lack of real evidence, whereas all the evidence I have seen presented, has been either proven fake or refuted. (You may deny this, but it's as I have seen it. Want to challenge it, make a thread).

I guess all my personal thoughts and works on trying to improve my sense of conscience, and philosophy of morality, have been a lie, huh?

Let me put it this way:

That's a serious lie. There are many reasons people deny concepts like a global flood or gods. Most of them, deny because they see it as not factual. Ignoring that and attacking their character, accusing them of being immoral, or wanting to sin by denying the exist of a god they "really know actually exists", is absolutely fallacious. There is no need for you to chime into a debate, just to say that anyone who disagrees with you is immoral/ungodly/lacking conscience/lying or whatever. You and others, trying to throw that lie out any chance given, doesn't convince anybody. Because the people it's directed at, know better.

Give it up. Your book also condemns Slander, Judging, and Lying. Hypocritical(And ironic) to have to Sin to misrepresent those who don't believe as want-to-be sinners.

P.S. Want to challenge the overall evidences(or lack of) for the floods existence; new thread. Same for God's existence; new thread. Or that all non-believers do believe but want to sin; new thread. Your whole post of off-topic. I responded not to further derailment, but because you were being baselessly derogatory. Keep these thread on topic. Any response minimum. Or if you really want to challenge me, PM. Or; new thread.