Why I don't believe the story of the Great Flood...

[_Sethbag]

Subgenius, during the time the Flood is supposed to have occurred, there were people living on every continent save Antarctica, who had been there for thousands of years prior, and continued on through the claimed Flood period, whose descendants carry on their peoples' existence down to this very day, unbroken.

This disproves the Flood without even referencing any other argument, because it is mutually exclusive with it, and what I've said is amply demonstrated through mountains of evidence.

Moreover, snow and ice layers were building up in Greenland and other places, creating records of annual layers which can and have been cut out and examined in detail by scientists. They were doing this long before the Flood, during the Flood period, and ever since. This is demonstrated by mountains of evidence, and is mutually exclusive with the Flood claims.

One could come up with thousands of such facts from the evidence of the Earth which contradict the Flood narrative of Earth's history. Crying out "Non-uniformitarianism!" isn't going to suffice.

You've hitched your wagon to the wrong team. It's not too late, though the process of accepting this and changing course is indeed painful and difficult.

[_Drifting]

Subgenius, during the time the Flood is supposed to have occurred, there were people living on every continent save Antarctica, who had been there for thousands of years prior, and continued on through the claimed Flood period, whose descendants carry on their peoples' existence down to this very day, unbroken.

This disproves the Flood without even referencing any other argument, because it is mutually exclusive with it, and what I've said is amply demonstrated through mountains of evidence.

This.
Just this.

[_LittleNipper]

Also see: http://www.answersingenesis.org/article ... he-animals

This page just keeps giving:

Studies of nonmechanized animal care indicate that eight people could have fed and watered 16,000 creatures. The key is to avoid unnecessary walking around. As the old adage says, “Don’t work harder, work smarter.”

Really? If they worked 24 hrs a day to feed and water the 2,000 animals they were tasked with caring for they would have less than a minute for each animal (60 mins * 24 hrs = 1440 mins).

The page creates more questions than answers. Basic math makes most of these feasibility arguments crumble.

It is likely that some animals were used to help clean and feed the other animals. Elephants could certainly pull and lift. and monkeys/apes can carry and distribute things. Bees make honey

[_subgenius]

Well there is more then just lack of evidence, but mountains showing no such event occurred during modern man's roaming the earth(you notice I said during the time of modern man since you don't seem to understand like everyone else that this is what the issue is about). The context I was discussing here is the idea of why God would need to use magic, not to create a global flood, but to hide the evidence and even create mountains of evidence to make it look like no global flood event occurred.

There are not "mountains of evidence", you have been misinformed. There is more actual evidence for a flood than actual evidence for not. Just because you have not seen the ark does not mean it never existed.
Alas, Mr Spock, not everything in life is logical, nor does it have to be in order to understand it.

Why should I not care? Why do you try to get people to believe certain things are true or not true. It's not like I am out protesting or knocking on your door. I used to be as a missionary for the LDS church. My parents believe in a global flood, but I think at this stage of their lives it would be more harmful to their happiness to try and change their beliefs. If you don't want to discuss these issues no one is forcing you to participate in these threads. I do think it is better in the long run if we as a society have more correct understanding of the universe, but I let people believe what ever they want.

again, why would you even want to change their beliefs....does someone's belief in the flood somehow infringe upon your personal liberty? your ability to work? to find love? to be happy?
i like your last line here - "but I let people believe what ever they want" - you will understand if i doubt your sincerity on that one.
seems like you are still a missionary...just not one for the church.

[_Drifting]

There are not "mountains of evidence", you have been misinformed. There is more actual evidence for a flood than actual evidence for not.

Which you're going to post in 3.....2......1......

[Guest]

Subgenius, during the time the Flood is supposed to have occurred, there were people living on every continent save Antarctica, who had been there for thousands of years prior, and continued on through the claimed Flood period, whose descendants carry on their peoples' existence down to this very day, unbroken.

This disproves the Flood without even referencing any other argument, because it is mutually exclusive with it, and what I've said is amply demonstrated through mountains of evidence.

Moreover, snow and ice layers were building up in Greenland and other places, creating records of annual layers which can and have been cut out and examined in detail by scientists. They were doing this long before the Flood, during the Flood period, and ever since. This is demonstrated by mountains of evidence, and is mutually exclusive with the Flood claims.

One could come up with thousands of such facts from the evidence of the Earth which contradict the Flood narrative of Earth's history. Crying out "Non-uniformitarianism!" isn't going to suffice.

You've hitched your wagon to the wrong team. It's not too late, though the process of accepting this and changing course is indeed painful and difficult.

Totally made up and lies. Only hearsay. Most cultures don't even have 4000 years of written language, let alone historic records that show they are the very same ones always living in a particular local. Oddly, the same people who discredit the Bible based on the belief that it is based on verbal tradition, don't apply the same logic to primitive cultures who insist that they've always lived somewhere...

[_Sethbag]

Isn't it great that Noah planted acres upon acres of clover and flowers and whatnot onboard the ark, so that those bees could make honey. Out of curiosity, LittleNipper, do you know what raw materials bees use to make honey?

[Guest]

Isn't it great that Noah planted acres upon acres of clover and flowers and whatnot onboard the ark, so that those bees could make honey. Out of curiosity, LittleNipper, do you know what raw materials bees use to make honey?

Flowering plants. Might there have been some as food on the Ark --- Why not? I notice you have no comments about putting elephants, monkeys, apes, horse, goats, oxen to work on board the ark.

[_subgenius]

Subgenius, during the time the Flood is supposed to have occurred, there were people living on every continent save Antarctica, who had been there for thousands of years prior, and continued on through the claimed Flood period, whose descendants carry on their peoples' existence down to this very day, unbroken.

the duration of their time in any place is rather ambiguous and is more uncertain than probable.

This disproves the Flood without even referencing any other argument, because it is mutually exclusive with it, and what I've said is amply demonstrated through mountains of evidence.

actually it would only disprove, or at least conflict with, the proposed date of the flood. If anything one could counter the argument by saying that the date of the flood disproves the claim that people were living on Africa at that time.
You introducing a conflict between two claims does not disprove either claim. At best you can only argue about the "date".

Moreover, snow and ice layers were building up in Greenland and other places, creating records of annual layers which can and have been cut out and examined in detail by scientists. They were doing this long before the Flood, during the Flood period, and ever since. This is demonstrated by mountains of evidence, and is mutually exclusive with the Flood claims.

you have no idea what you are talking about. you have no evidence/proof that any snow occurred 10k years ago at all...you are working on the assumption that snow over Greenland has been predictable and consistent over a period of time without evidence or observation to support that assumption.

One could come up with thousands of such facts from the evidence of the Earth which contradict the Flood narrative of Earth's history. Crying out "Non-uniformitarianism!" isn't going to suffice.

many of your "facts" offer no conclusion on a global flood. At best you just have no current geologic evidence that confirms a flood during a specific time and in a specific manner. Yet there are countless scientific indicators and evidence that support the claim of a flood.
I fear you have spent little time actually looking at the "evidence" both for and especially against your own claims.

You've hitched your wagon to the wrong team. It's not too late, though the process of accepting this and changing course is indeed painful and difficult.

Like you would know anything about any of that........and for the record, i ain't got no wagon....i travel light.

[_subgenius]

Isn't it great that Noah planted acres upon acres of clover and flowers and whatnot onboard the ark, so that those bees could make honey. Out of curiosity, LittleNipper, do you know what raw materials bees use to make honey?

your continued and misguided assumptions about the world and the spiritual are becoming quite amusing....it almost soothes the sting of your bitterness.