Replies

OK, I've got a free moment now to go through your initial claims of the source of the flood water.

Noah's Ark: I don't know enough details to consider myself any kind of expert but, looking at the whole story, it fits together. You're right, the rain was not the only source of water.

Well you are part right, rain as we understand cannot be the source of any of the water. Rain is oceanic precipitation and cannot raise global water levels.

Here are a few things to consider: Traditional understanding is that much of the water came from huge underground caverns, which collapsed, causing their contents to spew out. IOW, the pre-deluvian ocean surface was much smaller. Such caverns still exist under Florida.

Traditional understanding has no scientific standing and fails on numerous levels. (a) It implies a catastrophic global *lowering* of the land by several miles which is in no way implied or mentioned in the flood story. (b) The energy release from such an event would not be survivable by the ark or by fish. Like Krakatoa occuring everywhere in the world at once. (c) Such an event would leave global evidence behind on a vast scale, we are talking a billion cubic miles of water being squeezed out of caverns by a collapse. There is no such evidence. (A few small caves in Florida does not count as evidence)

Another source of water is "the floodgates of heaven." A few years ago, it was discovered that the earth is constantly colliding with huge masses of ice crystals lying along its orbital path. The apparent source of these crystals is - earth. We leave them behind as vapour and pick them back up, later. I suspect this process was somehow involved, as well.

Your "huge masses" of ice won't even begin to do the job. I don't even need a citation of them from you to know that this is a relatively tiny completely irrelevant phenomenon. However, for the sake of amusement, lets imagine the earth slamming into a billion cubic miles of ice (slightly more, in fact because ice is higher-volume than water) at solar-orbital velocity over a period of 40 days. Lets just think about the kinetic energy-loss involved.... 1/2 * m * v * v Yep, I think you just vaporised the earth with that theory. (Jehu will be so glad that math is being brought to bear on the subject)

The account indicates the flood as the first rain ever. That's quite a claim. If true, there must have been some massive atmospheric changes, as well.

I missed the reference to rain being a new phenomenon invented for the flood, though it begs the question how did the water cycle work before that? Massive atmospheric changes? You bet, I would be prepared to bet that no-one can postulate a mechanism for the flood that doesn't destroy the earth's atmosphere completely, and much of the earth's crust into the bargain.

Finally, another odd phrase is "the water covered all the mountains to a depth of 15 cubits." Well, all the mountains are not the same heighth. I believe a tidal wave is being described here - one large enough to travel around the whole earth.

You are the one who believes that the bible is an accurate literal account of real events (except perhaps when it doesn't suit you?). Genesis 7 16 to 7 20 quite clearly describes a gradual uplift of the flood waters till the mountains are covered, not a global "tidal wave" (though I did enjoy the mental picture of the aghast Noah who has just spent 100 years building a boat according to the Lord's instruction looking at the giant tidal wave that is about to utterly destroy it)

The Scandinavian and pacific island accounts indicate something of this nature, as well.

Well, would you believe it? People who live on islands by or in the ocean have myths and stories about being inundated by hurricanes/tsunamis/typhoons. Incredible, I would never have expected that, any more than I would expect river civilisations who haven't mastered flood engineering to have "rainy" flood stories

P. S. There is no way of knowing where Noah lived, prior to the flood. We only know he landed somewhere between Turkey and Egypt.

If he lived at all, he lived in the middle east, and once saved his family from a local flood (that seemed like global devastation to those involved) in a boat. Possibly he saved some livestock too.

If you guys can believe a blind stupid "force" allowed US to come about with our several trillion cells working in complete sychronicity, producing millions of proteins, duplicating themselves with an error rate of 1 gene error in 10 million copies. That "evolution developed the human brain, the five senses.

That evolution dictated we loose our fur (to what evolutionary advantage?). And that we became upright with the loss of land speed due to the loss of two legs for locomotion. That all the specifics of every organ is contained within the genetic code in each and every cell...except the sex cells which only have half the genes of the individual. And that all the specific cells for every organ KNOW where to go to form the human body while still in the womb. That the human brain has more connections than all the telephone systems in the world put together, and those connections pre-wired in the genetic code.

Well I guess I can EASILY believe the pre-flood earth existed in different physical circumstances than today, including an atmosphere that contained no dust or salt crystals so that moisture could precipitate as rain...never before seen until some change in the atmosphere, including the possible introduction of inter-stellar masses of water, earthquakes (look what one did under the Indian Ocean!) Water is still not drained from the land that was flooded!

Also the Bible does not indicate if the flood was local or global, arguments are made for both viewpoints. The best arguments are for a flood, ONLY where man existed, since it was his sin that was being judged.

Now you guys postulate a mechanism for all of speciation that nobody has ever observed, the fossil evidence is in direct contradiction to this theory...and yet you still believe in THIS theory, contrary to all the evidence, modern science, information theory, irreducible complexity, and just plain common sense that no natural processes can produce something as incredible as consciousness, or self-awareness. A quality that is obviously transcendental to sheer matter.

And you base this belief, starting from a mediocre scientist from the 19th century who knew hardly anything about cells, nothing about DNA, who's own words about the fossil record have been falsified, and who believed in Lamarckian inheritance. Hardly a credible source to invest so much time and effort to prop up this rickety and moth-eaten theory. It's days are numbered, so is the hiding place for your unbelief. Agnostics and atheists will have to find a new way to throw rocks at God. Meanwhile many of us will give honor to God for the wonders of HIS creation. And we will marvel at the stupidity that unbelief can generate.