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

[_SteelHead]

Magic required for the LDS narrative:

Magically changed the nature of light.
Magically never rained before the flood.
Magically changed the whole nature of life on earth as the water cycle upon which life is based must have been different.
Magically change herbivors into obligate carnivores.
Magically design a boat that can hold more than its calculable volume as there is no way for all the species of non insect animals and feed for them to fit on the boat.
Magically make it flood without leaving evidence. Kill all life on earth without any evidence.
Re arrange the continents without any evidence.
Magically make the lava flows, ash clouds, and any evidence of continental re arrangement disappear.
Magically shunt the billions of gigajoules of energy needed to move mountains, rearrange plates, raise seabeds etc away, and the colossal catastrophe that would result away so that there is no impact nor evidence for it having happened.
Magically make it rain a volume of water that doesn't exist, then make said water vanish.
Magically spread the species around and have the prey species live long enough to repopulate the planet in the face of predation.

Etc etc etc it is turtles all the way down. With each implausible pseudo scientific claim leading to a worse one.

Which scenario is more likely? A magic omnipotent being frying ants under the magnifying glass with the planet his sculptable ant farm, then erasing the evidence of his continental sculpting, world flooding hissy fit 5k years ago, or that the history of the earth as contained in the Bible is wrong?

[_subgenius]

As was posted previously, Australian scientist have already determined that the 28% dry land we have today was likely 2% (or less) some time ago.

LOLOLOLOLOLOL Why not say when these scientists said this happened. I have to laugh at you and frank wanting to quote scientific literature as though one thing in might support what you want but leave the rest out. Lets try to be honest with what they have to say.

i addressed the date in my original posting of this article, and noted that the chronology is not a point of fact with this discussion. If we agree that there is now evidence that the earth was indeed flooded at some point in time then it lends more credibility to the tradition that God flooded the earth as has been noted by cultures across time and geography - the idea that if the flood happened 6o years or 60 million years ago is not pertinent to the recognition that the flood actually happened. This is an important distinction because many of the quasi-scientist, such as yourself, have spent a lot of effort exclaiming that the flood could not have possibly happened (no matter when) - which is a laughable position in the first case because science, by its nature, is completely incapable of proving anything as impossible.

Granted the average height of mountains are about 4000 meters but most mountains were not created "gradually" but rather abruptly.

And where is your scientific evidence most mountains were created abruptly. Also is abruptly for you a matter of minutes, days, weeks, years, or millions of years. If millions of years then I would agree.

by all means, don't take my word for it...talk to the real scientists....here is a nifty example about the tallest mountain known on the planet
....Muna Kea is the world's largest mountain at over 10,000 m and its rocks are dated at about 31,000 to 237,000 years old.
last known eruption was apparently 6,000 years ago...mountain created pretty quick i would say....especially when compared to your belief of "millions of years".
millions of years? not necessary apparently....your arrogance has just borne its bitter fruit of embarrassment to you.
Here is a link where you can begin to learn about mountains too

And since most mountains have evidence of being at a lower level atop them there is no real geologic stretch required in what the Australians are demonstrating.

I don't think any one is disagreeing with what they are saying. We just don't pick and choose what we are going to keep and throw out. I don't see them suggesting most mountains forming in weeks or years, or that the world was almost completely covered anytime millions of years ago.

i have never argued any position about chronology in the manner you are suggesting here.

The quasi-scientist on this thread still have no rebuttal for the simple notion that if one recognizes that God could flood the world, then surely God could flood the world. The "rules" of physical science do not apply to the Divine (ergo the term supernatural)...i mean, there is currently no scientific support for a man to be able to walk on water, let alone walking on water by faith alone (Peter).

I am going to assume a typo and you meant create instead of flood. You and frank continue to miss the point. If you want to say magic, just say magic and be done with it. It's you and people like frank who want to pull out pseudo science, or misrepresent actual scientists as you are with these Australian scientists. Now the problem we see with the magic card that people have been bringing it up over and over again is that this God has to hide the evidence a global flood ever happened in which all people, except 8, and most life destroyed. This God has to bring it all back to pre-flood conditions including people. That is why this God would be like Loki. This is the real point people are trying to get you and others like frank to grasp.

i have misrepresented nothing. The discussion was that people, such as yourself, have claimed that a global flood was impossible and was not supported by any credible scientific evidence...i have contradicted that position by providing credible scientific evidence that a global flood may indeed have occurred.
Beyond that i admitted it was speculation...but with all good science evidence can lead to an increase in the probability that something is "true". What the science from Australia did was lean that probability more in my favor and less in yours - whereas it is more likely, now, that there was a global flood which obviously is an uncomfortable admission for someone like you and in your defense you have chosen to move the goal post and argue about chronology rather than the original point of whether there ever was a flood or not.

[_subgenius]

Magic required for the LDS narrative:

Magically changed the nature of light.

not true, the Australians have provided reasonable science for lack of water vapor in air...a crucial element in making rainbows, thus making it scientifically plausible that rainbows were absent from the earth.

Magically never rained before the flood.

no one has ever claimed that it did not rain before the flood.

Magically changed the whole nature of life on earth as the water cycle upon which life is based must have been different.

a poor conclusion on your part and an even worse speculation. You are seemingly unaware of the science involved on this matter.

Magically change herbivors into obligate carnivores.

nonsense

Magically design a boat that can hold more than its calculable volume as there is no way for all the species of non insect animals and feed for them to fit on the boat.

arguable, especially given that there is no determination as to how many "species" were in existence, but furthermore if one recognizes that God caused the flood and spoke to Noah then one must concede that God could accommodate.

Magically make it flood without leaving evidence. Kill all life on earth without any evidence.

lack of evidence does not exclude existence...every good scientist knows this.

Re arrange the continents without any evidence.

again, you seem to need a primer on basic science and geography

Magically make the lava flows, ash clouds, and any evidence of continental re arrangement disappear.

zzzzzz

Magically shunt the billions of gigajoules of energy needed to move mountains, rearrange plates, raise seabeds etc away, and the colossal catastrophe that would result away so that there is no impact nor evidence for it having happened.

Ok, then let us change the subject....where did the dinosaurs go?

Magically make it rain a volume of water that doesn't exist, then make said water vanish.

you are poorly informed and seem to make assumption about the flood that no other competent mind makes.

Magically spread the species around and have the prey species live long enough to repopulate the planet in the face of predation.

the timeline is feasible given the current scientific knowledge.

Etc etc etc it is turtles all the way down. With each implausible pseudo scientific claim leading to a worse one.

you really should read and understand the original source for "turtles all the way down" because it does not support your cause but rather mocks you inability to discern it.

Which scenario is more likely? A magic omnipotent being frying ants under the magnifying glass with the planet his sculptable ant farm, then erasing the evidence of his continental sculpting, world flooding hissy fit 5k years ago, or that the history of the earth as contained in the Bible is wrong?

this type of "concluding" is embarrassing to your parents

[_SteelHead]

Sub,
Where to begin.

Comparing the growth of active volcanoes to non volcanic mountains is useless.

Saying that the flood is as valid 60 million years ago as 6 thousand invalidates the story of the flood as it removes Noah from the equation. The whole story of the creation and the flood go out the window. The chronology is important. There is a huge difference in the scale of energies in making mountains overnight vs across millions and millions of years.

Bad psuedo science breeding worse.

[Guest]

Magic required for the LDS narrative:

Magically changed the nature of light.

not true, the Australians have provided reasonable science for lack of water vapor in air...a crucial element in making rainbows, thus making it scientifically plausible that rainbows were absent from the earth.

This was in referencing a claim of Frank's that light behaved differently to explain away rainbows.

Magically never rained before the flood.

no one has ever claimed that it did not rain before the flood.

This has been claimed by nippers and others. And has been evidenced by them as why there were no rainbows and supported by the mist watering scriptures of genesis.

Magically changed the whole nature of life on earth as the water cycle upon which life is based must have been different.

a poor conclusion on your part and an even worse speculation. You are seemingly unaware of the science involved on this matter.

References the claims of no rain. Go study the water cycle of the earth and how it ties in to the lifecycle of various species. Try callibaetis.

Magically change herbivors into obligate carnivores.

nonsense

In reference to the claims by hoops and others as well as the genesis account that everything, including tigers ate grass and herbs until after the fall or flood depending on whose claim you want to address. Either way requires a complete re working of the digestive tract of a tiger. Tigers being obligate carnivores.

Magically design a boat that can hold more than its calculable volume as there is no way for all the species of non insect animals and feed for them to fit on the boat.

arguable, especially given that there is no determination as to how many "species" were in existence, but furthermore if one recognizes that God caused the flood and spoke to Noah then one must concede that God could accommodate.

Magic!

Magically make it flood without leaving evidence. Kill all life on earth without any evidence.

lack of evidence does not exclude existence...every good scientist knows this.

For a global event..... That killed off all of the life on the planet....? This is what you come back with? Get a clue.

Re arrange the continents without any evidence.

again, you seem to need a primer on basic science and geography

In reference to Frank's ideas about the volume of water, and maleable mountains and seabeds. Yes they move but wholescale rearranging over a couple of years would take and release tremendous energy. You need the primers sub...

Magically make the lava flows, ash clouds, and any evidence of continental re arrangement disappear.

zzzzzz

The energy has got to go somewhere when you go from pangea to the current continental layout in a day, a week, a year.

Magically shunt the billions of gigajoules of energy needed to move mountains, rearrange plates, raise seabeds etc away, and the colossal catastrophe that would result away so that there is no impact nor evidence for it having happened.

Ok, then let us change the subject....where did the dinosaurs go?

died, replaced, some evolved into birds.

Magically make it rain a volume of water that doesn't exist, then make said water vanish.

you are poorly informed and seem to make assumption about the flood that no other competent mind makes.

If the topology of the earth at the time of the flood in any way resembles what is does now, the 4.5 billion cubic kms of water are required to inundate it. Do the math.

Magically spread the species around and have the prey species live long enough to repopulate the planet in the face of predation.

the timeline is feasible given the current scientific knowledge.

Not at all. Not with the variety of species in the variety of places that we currently have. Most of the species were well below their respective thresholds for population viability. The predators would have depopulated the prey before the 1st generation.

Etc etc etc it is turtles all the way down. With each implausible pseudo scientific claim leading to a worse one.

you really should read and understand the original source for "turtles all the way down" because it does not support your cause but rather mocks you inability to discern it.

I am not the one making the magic claims.... Supported with crap science.

Which scenario is more likely? A magic omnipotent being frying ants under the magnifying glass with the planet his sculptable ant farm, then erasing the evidence of his continental sculpting, world flooding hissy fit 5k years ago, or that the history of the earth as contained in the Bible is wrong?

this type of "concluding" is embarrassing to your parents

Right. Keep on drinking the koolaide sub.

[_Franktalk]

What you are actually trying to prove is that your God sank the continents, raised the sea floors, then flooded the world, destroyed all life except for Noah and his family and animals on the ark......and then destroyed all evidence of doing so?

I offer no proof and I also don't declare that the rising sea floor happened. I only say that there is evidence out there that can be looked in that way. What is very telling is that many feel that only their interpretation of trace evidence is valid and all other possibilities are false. Not so much because the evidence points in another direction but because it disagrees with some arbitrary consensus of like minded people. People who by the way refuse to even consider anything outside of natural bounds. So atheist define a godless universe and then call anyone who thinks God had a hand in the creation stupid. So their beliefs lead them to their attitudes. My beliefs lead me to my worldview which opens my eyes to other possible interpretations of past events and trace evidence. So just so we stand on equal ground I will say that all people who limit them self to only natural explanations are exceptionally stupid. Well that was fun to say. I really don't believe that but I am sure you felt what many people of faith feel when they read trash talk on these boards.

[_Themis]

i addressed the date in my original posting of this article, and noted that the chronology is not a point of fact with this discussion.

No, you didn't at all. The date is in fact very important here to Noah's flood. How you miss this must be shear stupidly or extreme religious bias.

If we agree that there is now evidence that the earth was indeed flooded at some point in time then it lends more credibility to the tradition that God flooded the earth as has been noted by cultures across time and geography - the idea that if the flood happened 6o years or 60 million years ago is not pertinent to the recognition that the flood actually happened.

We don't agree at all. You misrepresent these scientists in the extreme. This is not a flood event, but a time well before 60 millions years ago, in the earth early existence when continental crust has not grown very much so most of the earth is under water. This is not a flood. I don't look out at the ocean and say, "wow that's a big flood".

This is an important distinction because many of the quasi-scientist, such as yourself, have spent a lot of effort exclaiming that the flood could not have possibly happened (no matter when) - which is a laughable position in the first case because science, by its nature, is completely incapable of proving anything as impossible.

At least we keep to the evidence. Noah's flood is about the last 5-10k years ago and the possibility of flooding the whole earth. We are not talking about these scientist's findings of about 2.5 billion years ago, or even a million years ago when man was not on the earth.

by all means, don't take my word for it...talk to the real scientists....here is a nifty example about the tallest mountain known on the planet
....Muna Kea is the world's largest mountain at over 10,000 m and its rocks are dated at about 31,000 to 237,000 years old.
last known eruption was apparently 6,000 years ago...mountain created pretty quick i would say....especially when compared to your belief of "millions of years".
millions of years? not necessary apparently....your arrogance has just borne its bitter fruit of embarrassment to you.
Here is a link where you can begin to learn about mountains too

I know this is the celestial forum, but I have to wonder how stupid one is to provide links to sites that refute them and show the other guy is right. You provide a link to one of the ways Mountains can build up fast(geologically speaking) and it still is about a million years old. Did you miss that in my post. This kind of mountain building is not even where most of the world's mountains were formed, and that formation process was even longer.

i have misrepresented nothing. The discussion was that people, such as yourself, have claimed that a global flood was impossible and was not supported by any credible scientific evidence...i have contradicted that position by providing credible scientific evidence that a global flood may indeed have occurred.
Beyond that i admitted it was speculation...but with all good science evidence can lead to an increase in the probability that something is "true". What the science from Australia did was lean that probability more in my favor and less in yours - whereas it is more likely, now, that there was a global flood which obviously is an uncomfortable admission for someone like you and in your defense you have chosen to move the goal post and argue about chronology rather than the original point of whether there ever was a flood or not.

Ah the fantasy world where black is white and white is black. I will let the lurkers judge for themselves here. I think it's way to obvious.

[_Drifting]

Hey sub, do you believe what the Church teaches?
You know...global flood, covered whole earth, killed everyone and everything not on the ark, happened 2,300 bc.

Do you have a testimony that that is what happened?
[ ] Yes
[ ] No

[_subgenius]

Sub,
Where to begin.

it has been apparent you were without direction

Comparing the growth of active volcanoes to non volcanic mountains is useless.

spoken like someone who was just proven to be inadequate in their knowledge of mountains...point is that you asked and you were answered, accurately.

Saying that the flood is as valid 60 million years ago as 6 thousand invalidates the story of the flood as it removes Noah from the equation. The whole story of the creation and the flood go out the window. The chronology is important. There is a huge difference in the scale of energies in making mountains overnight vs across millions and millions of years.

the chronology is a different matter. I have already defeated the argument that a global flood, regardless of when, is impossible...and yes, that has been a primary stance by many narrow-minded quasi scientists.
But predictably so, you are moving the goalposts...now its not about the flood occurring at all...now you are shifting the argument to chronology...and understandably so. Now your only argument is that the chronology is the matter of truth for the flood story. And for that chronology you are trying to rely on one ambiguous chronology compared to another ambiguous chronology - with one exception, your chronology does not admit that is ambiguous.
So, if it is a chronological issue with you (and not a feasibility issue) then please, provide the scripture reference that notes the date of the flood. If the Bible has a statement about the chronological location of the flood then we can surely argue the position of chronology.
But, if not...then you will have to simply pick up the goal post, again, and move them elsewhere.

Bad psuedo science breeding worse.

seemingly you are incapable of recognizing either...but i am curious, what exactly is 'good' pseudo-science?

[_Drifting]

So, if it is a chronological issue with you (and not a feasibility issue) then please, provide the scripture reference that notes the date of the flood. If the Bible has a statement about the chronological location of the flood then we can surely argue the position of chronology.
But, if not...then you will have to simply pick up the goal post, again, and move them elsewhere.

The Church teaches (and includes in its Bible chronology) that it took place in 2,300 bc. You know this. The question is, do you believe it?