Worldwide FLOOD Worldwide EVIDENCE

AiG ^ | May 4, 2009

[doc1019]

I stand by my original statement … regardless the article or it’s “idoicy”.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thanks for the ping!

[Wacka]

Typical tripe masquerading as “science” from GGG.

[Wacka]

I thought GGG’s obsession with swine flu would last longer, but damn, it didn’t.

[count-your-change]

According to the chronology of Genesis Noah was born just a few years after Seth, Adam's son, died and Noah's son Shem outlived Sarah, Abraham's wife.
This suggests how an eyewitness account of the Flood could be preserved as well as many of the events taking place in the Garden of Eden, events well known to men like Lamech, Noah's father. (Gen. 5:29)

[spetznaz]

My problem with this is not what they say, but the base manipulation of facts inherent in some of the things said. I read what the following gentleman (Andrew Snelling, who holds a Ph.D. in geology from the University of Sydney) had to say about how fossils got to the top of mountains, and it is quite amazing how he uses the same manipulation and semantic-plays that AiG claims evolutionists use ...it is also interesting that he has a Ph.D in geology when he says some of the things he states.

The Himalayas has fossils at very high levels, yet that is easily explainable by looking at how those mountains formed (mountains can form in a number of ways, divided into 3 main ways ....the Himalayas is a fold mountain, which is formed by the pressure between two converging tectonic plates forcing the material upwards). Thus, what was once below sea-level has slowly been going up, and that is how the sea-fossils ended up where they are.

Alright ...what about proof. Well, the thing is that the tectonic plates are still converging (as the Indian sub-continent continues to move into Asia ...specifically the Eurasian plate and the Indo-Australian plate ...but I guess the Ph.D in geology knew that), and guess what ...the Himalayas are getting higher. A slow but measurable rate, going up bit by bit ...between 4mm-10mm each year, every year. This is not some 'theory' (although theory in science is different from what people assume theory means ....e.g. the 'theory of gravity' in science is quite different from a 'theory that Obama must wonder whether Saudi royalty manicures their toes whenever he bows down before a Saudi monarch' in common-speak. The Himalayas are still getting higher by just under a centimeter a year ...something that semantic twists on 'theories' cannot just negate.

Now, why would someone who (since he claims he has a Ph.D in geology, and would obviously know that), play on semantics that make those who either read it too fast, or do not have a cogent educational background, assume that waters were above the Himalayas as they are? Isn't this the same nonsense that some claim evolutionists use?

As for AiG ...I understand (and as a Christian support) what they are trying to do by supporting religion using scientific bases, but they do not have to resort to base manipulation to do so. It just makes them seem low.

Even worse, it gives those who would serve to discredit them ammunition to shout over the other stuff they have to say. It reminds me a few years back when a FReeper called Ichnuemon (or something along those lines ...I know in latin it stems from Fish) was easily making scores of religious FReepers look like utter fools, since they would come up with seriously baseless 'proofs' that were so easy to tear apart. It was sad ...and to be honest Ichnuemon was totally correct!

As for AiG ...again, I like what they are doing. They just DO NOT have to resort to base manipulation to do so. There is so much out there they can use that is above board.

Also, they need to stop doing stupid things, like the expedition a few years back to the Congo to try and prove the existence of Mkolele-Mbembe (an alleged 'dinosaur' that locals, and some foreign travels, claim lives in a lake there called Lake Tele). Proving 'dinosaurs' still exist would 'prove' a young Earth. Goodness ....what next! Trawling around at Loch Ness.

The world is so full of the beauty of God's creation, and personally I have no problem if God used evolution to make the world. 6 days to me does not have to mean 6 literal days ...since a day to God does not necessarily mean 24 hours! Also, looking at how Genesis shows the story of creation, it follows almost word for word the evolutionary path (i.e., plants, then sea creatures, which come to land, etc etc etc ...and at the end humans). In my view, science and God totally exist ...I don't need to start causing (humiliating) issues like that gent who was causing a ruckus (which obvioulsy made media) because some scientist (Bill the Science Guy) had told some people that the Moon reflects sunlight and doesn't create its own light. That's just plain silly.

However, for me the most important thing is this ...my going to heaven is not dependent on whether I believe God create the Earth in 6 HUMAN days, or in 6 days (with a day being something that only God would see as a day). My going to heaven will be dependent on my relationship with Christ as savior, and that is enough for me.

People can argue whether the moon generates its own light (very stupid, and something even a first grader would know better ....for that fact, those 14 astronauts who have landed on the moon during that period that Americans were heading there, reported about 'Earth-light'....the reflection of the Sun's rays by the Earth as viewed on the Moon), or funding trips to track down some African Loch-ness monster-wannabe, or using word-play to insinuate that fossils are on the Himalayas due to a giant flood. I'd rather focus on Christ instead.

As for the flood story ...interestingly there was a major flood recorded in that region, and also shows up in many other cultures. I would like to read what 'cover the Earth' is in the original language (well ...original would be interesting since my Amplified normally looks at the Greek mostly, but at least that is somewhat close). Cover the earth could mean cover the entire land, and a flood covering (say the whole of the Mid West if an ice dam that was there collapsed, or say the entire area around Lake Baikal in Russia, or etc etc etc) could be seen by people living there as, quite literally, covering the whole Earth ...even though Australia is still as bone-dry as ever.

Anyways ...no need for semantic word-plays, no need for misinformation, and there are more important things thatg light-generation on the Moon (goodness!!!!!) In my mind it is all silly ....endless discussion on small things that have no real relation. All to prove things that most people who argue for them (e.g. the Earth being 6,000 years old) do not even KNOW where they came from. For instance, that figure came from James Ussher, who used to be an Anglican Bishop of Ireland in the 17th century, where Ussher 'calculated' that the world began on the eve of Sunday October 23 4004 BC. Approximately, 6,000 years ago. His calculations are quite flawed, although I can see why the precise date of creation was important back then ....at that time people were interested in all sorts of silly things, like (literally) how many angels can dance on the head of a pin!

How will that save your soul? So what if it is one or one trillion ...absolutely silly.

These days it is hunting for Mkolele-Mbembe to prove man walked with dinosaurs.

[Natufian]

“It was alot more than a flood; it was a total remake of the crust of the Earth.”

A process that fish survived how?

[count-your-change]

To be fair to Dr. Snelling (it isn’t just a claim of a PhD. though that doesn’t make him correct in all thing geology), this is what he actually said after posing the question of how fossils were deposited to be found so high in the mountains,

“We must remember that the rock layers in the Himalayas and other mountain ranges around the globe were deposited during the Flood, well before these mountains were formed. In fact, many of these mountain ranges were pushed up by earth movements to their present high elevations at the end of the Flood.”

So did he say the waters were above the Himalayas at their present elevation of some 30,000 ft. or so?

Ahhh...No.

But if you’re interested in the word used for covered, here is an entry from Strong’s:

“kacah
kaw-saw’
a primitive root; properly, to plump, i.e. fill up hollows; by implication, to cover (for clothing or secrecy):—clad self, close, clothe, conceal, cover (self), (flee to) hide, overwhelm. Compare ‘kasah’ (3780).”

I don’t agree with some of the arguments and “proofs” offered by ‘the earth is 6000 years old’ creationists
but their beliefs are hardly a personal affront to me.

Does the question of whether the Noachian flood was an exaggerated local affair, if not complete myth, or truly global as described in Genesis really matter or is pertinent to our relationship with Christ as savior?

I would reply to say Jesus used the Genesis account as an warning example as did his apostle Peter. Neither treated it as myth or exaggeration. I would further add that believing what Christ believed IS important to one’s salvation.

But then I also think angels have better things to do than dance on heads of pins though that was never really a seriously debated question as far as I can discover.

[tacticalogic]

It’s no longer about the Word, it’s about the words.

[RFEngineer]

“I stand by my original statement … regardless the article or it’s “idoicy”.”

Most creationists/Biblical literalists are not as strong in faith as you. They have to invent “science” with a foregone conclusion. My guess is that they think it pleases God to fabricate scientific “evidence”.

Yours is the only honest position of Faith. The creationist science types, ironically, propagate lies in an unnecessary attempt to bolster the Truth.

[spetznaz]

Actually, for me, the Word is far more important than words. As I mentioned, the most important thing to me is The Word ...not when the World was made (down to the date), or other stuff I consider silly (like the Creation Museum in Petersburg Kentucky, that stated T-Rex used its teeth to eat gigantic 100-pound watermelons that existed before the Flood).

To be honest, whether T-Rex was an apex predator, whether it was a scavenger, or whether it was some massive herbivore that ate giant seedless watermelons that some person somehow came up with as a theory (oh, the 'theory' word again ...this time on the creationist side) ....it simply does not matter! Is there some giant reptilian creature in Lake Tele in the Congo ...it simply does not matter (although from a biological point of view it would be quite a find). Are Thunderbirds real, or the similar tales in Zimbabwe that the Answers in Genesis website also refers to, and presents a theory (that word again) that they may be Pterodactyls ...it doesn't matter. Is the World 6,000 years old, the 'revised' 10,000 years old, or the scientific ages old ....it really doesn't matter.

To a Christian, the only thing that matters is where you stand in regards to Christ, and that is the true Word. Not some archbishop calculating numbers and figures ...your ending up in heaven or hell does not matter on smidget on any of that.

I like how Colossians 2 states it:

16 So let no one judge you in food or in drink, or regarding a festival or a new moon or sabbaths, 17 vwhich are a shadow of things to come, but the substance is of Christ. 18 Let no one cheat you of your reward, taking delight in false humility and worship of angels, intruding into those things which he has not seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind, 19 and not holding fast to the Head, from whom all the body, nourished and knit together by joints and ligaments, grows with the increase that is from God. 20 , if you died with Christ from the basic principles of the world, why, as though living in the world, do you subject yourselves to regulations— 21 “Do not touch, do not taste, do not handle,” 22 which all concern things which perish with the using— according to the commandments and doctrines of men? 23 These things indeed have an appearance of wisdom in self-imposed religion, false humility, and 5neglect of the body, but are of no value against the indulgence of the flesh.

Very MANY things are touched on there, but for this purpose I like the very beginning where it states that 'So let no one judge you in food or in drink, or regarding a festival or a new moon or sabbaths, 17 vwhich are a shadow of things to come, but the 2substance is of Christ.' Which are a shadow of things to come, instead of the substance of Christ. As a Christian, it is all about Christ. Personally I believe that God may have used a process stretching ages to create the world (my 'theory' is that a day for God was not 24 hours), while another Christian may believe in 6 LITERAL days (as in 6 24 hour days). As long as he and I believe in the rissen Christ, and have accepted Him into our hearts, it does not matter whether to him the world was created in 4,004 BC, or to me was created ages and ages before that.

As Titus 3:9 states:

9 But avoid foolish disputes, genealogies, contentions, and strivings about the law; for they are unprofitable and useless.

At the end of the day, it is the Word (Christ) that matters.

[count-your-change]

Well said. Thanks.

[editor-surveyor]

"My problem with this is not what they say, but the base manipulation of facts inherent in some of the things said."

No, your problem is that you wish us to buy your strawman rant.

Nothing that you present is valid, because it has all been discussed, and well answered hundreds of times. We are not here to reinvent the wheel for the thousandth time.

Fish fossils are on mountain tops because the Genesis judgement killed them in massive quantities, and the subsequent upheaval of the Earth's crust created mountains out of what had been the bottom of the original shallow ocean. The fact that the upheaval is still somewhat in motion is in no way a detriment to what the subject article states, and I cannot see how you expect to twist it to be so.

Just where is this alleged "manipulation?"

All that you mention is strong evidence in support of the Genesis judgement.

[editor-surveyor]

"A process that fish survived how?"

The fossil record speaks to the fact that the majority of them died en mass, and ended up as fossil beds on the tops of mountains.

The fossil record is the flood/judgment record in every way. There are no large fossil beds at the bottom of lakes or oceans today, why?

[sitetest]

Dear editor-surveyor,

Is this a ping list to which you've pinged me? Which one? Just how did I get on it?

Thanks,

sitetest

[Wacka]

There are no large fossil beds at the bottom of lakes or oceans today, why? How do you know? Have you gone down there and looked for yourself? Most dead fish, whales, etc are eaten by scavengers, including the bones. I have seen (on TV) a whale skeleton COVERED with hagfish, feeding on the bones.

[what's up]

I read one commentary that claimed that Shem may actually have been Melchizedek. Don't know if that's true but it was an interesting thought.

[tacticalogic]

So the continental drift and subsequent creation of the mountain ranges came after the flood and the killing and fossilization of all the plants and animals?

[editor-surveyor]

Most of the fossilization had to be during the massive water flows.

The continents didn’t just ‘drift,’ they were rapidly hydroplanning.

[editor-surveyor]

"How do you know? Have you gone down there and looked for yourself? Most dead fish, whales, etc are eaten by scavengers, including the bones. I have seen (on TV) a whale skeleton COVERED with hagfish, feeding on the bones."

Wow, you just flashed on the very point!

Fossil beds are not normal happenings; they only happen when essentially an entire population is killed, and buried enough to be inaccessable, all at once.