|
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
 Posted - 02/20/2005 : 04:51:29 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by David Mc
Furshur,
Biblically, the Ark thing can happen. With racism so well known and how we know it was applied in 19th century America, "animalizing" another human race is quite possible. (i.e. Jew=Man and Gentile=Animal) Only a part of the Earth needs to be flooded to destroy "Man". There's plenty of room for life to continue as is. I know the concept shakes the foundations some, but there it is.
If memory serves me, the lands were flooded to some 15 cubits over the tallest mountain. I've forgotten the hight of Ararat, but that's a lot of local, deep water no matter who's version of the cubit you use. What exactly, held it all in place for so long?
Heh, and don't let AiG hear you say that. It would torque their spincters 'cause it's not in line with a literal interpretation of the Bible..... On second thought, tell 'em! Sarfati does sputter so, when someone has the temerity to disagree with him. 
Of all the Creationist claims, the Flood is the most difficult to defend. It defies too many known facts, including the laws of physics. That much water arriving in that short a time, for example, would be similiar to hydrolic mining and would strip away all the topsoil, leaving bedrock under a noxious layer of mud where farms used to be.
Further, those waters would not be calm ones. The ark as described would not have had the strength to withstand any sort of heavy weather, and would have broken up in the first hour afloat. The largest wooden ship ever built was the Grand Republic, at some 350 feet. It was built by David McKay of Boston, and was probably the only, major mistake this master shipbuilder ever made. The GR was slow and cranky, hogging, sagging, and snaking with every swell, and had to be pumped constantly. She finally foundered in a storm in the Caribbian, abandoned by her crew with 15 feet of water in her holds. As I recall, the GR had something like three layers of hull strakes installed diagonally for strength. The ark, at some 450 feet had but one.
Wood is simply not strong enough for a ship over 290 feet or so, even with iron bracing taking up cargo space, as was the case with other 300 foot + sailing ships.
Going back a bit further, the ark was built with bronze-age technology by folk who'd never been to sea, so far as is known from the Bible. To build the described ship, or rather; barge, shipyard facilities would be required. This would mean sawpits, foundries, smithies, rope walks, hoisting machinery, and so forth; not to mention some means of transporting the logs when a forest of gopher trees was clear-cut for the lumber. That in itself itself would be a huge undertaking with the tools at hand.
And how many tons of pitch were required to coat the ark inside and out? I don't know either, but it would have been not a few of 'em. You would end up with a small city serving the labor-intensive yards. And how many of these people would have had stuctural engineering experience?
And assuming the ark survived as told (chuckle), Noah would have been greeted with a barren landscape where nothing would grow for many years. Every creature aboard would have starved to death after they were finished eating each other.... Wait! I'm incorrect. They would have died sooner of thirst or as likely, something like typhus from trying to drink contaminated water. All of the wells, the most precious things these people had, would be gone; filled in with mud.
Come to think of it, where did Noah get the vast amount of required drinking water during the voyage? He couldn't drink what he was floating in due to salt and corpse contamination. 
Now let's take a quick peek at the fossil record -- Creationist apologetics get downright lyrical when the fossils appear. But I'll resist the temptation to whack that beehive like bass drum, and keep it short and simple.
Oh hell, I just can't stand it... Let's whack that hive! Had the Flood as described occured, the fossil record would show up looking like a pile of jackstraws. All species would be represented at all levels of it. But such is not the case. The fossil record is tightly ordered, showing a history that did not include a brief, violent flood event. There are no hominid fossils in context with dinosaurs; no dinos in context with trilobites; Icthyostega did not die next to Megatherium, and now the fun begins.
The apologetists blather that some species died later 'cause they were better equiped to run up hill.  Thus I must ask why Velociraptor, an animal that could run like thief, is not ever found in later strata, in context with with more modern species?
Well, they gasp, that's on account of 'hydrolic sorting.'
I beg you're pardon?
Yeah, that's it! The bones all got sorted out 'cause the heavier animals sank faster. That's how come there ain't no dinos with humans, even though they lived at the same time.
Erm, then you're saying that the remains of lighter animals such as the mammals of the Jurassic should exist in modern strata?
Oh, not necessarly! They probably lived in places that fossils had a hard time forming.
But we have fossils of them, all from Jurassic strata.
Well, that's just the luck of the draw, and besides, as none of the strata is over 10,000 years old, it might as well all be modern.
I see. You are saying that the entire geologic column is no more than 10,000 years old. I would be interested to see what part of the Bible makes that ridiculous statment.
Well, it doesn't per se, but if you count up the Begats, it comes out to about 6.000 years. I'm being generous and giving you a few more.
There are empirical data to confirm that, then? I don't recall seeing any.
We don't need data; it's in all the Bible!
But the Bible is not a scientific text. Where in Genesis does it describs this hydrolic sorting twaddle?
It's not twaddle! It happened!
And you can reference it independantly?
I don't need references! My faith tells me it's true!
And so forth ad nauseum.
|
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist! 
|
| Edited by - filthy on 02/20/2005 06:53:56 |
 |
|
|
David Mc
Skeptic Friend
USA
63 Posts |
Posted - 02/20/2005 : 10:41:48 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by filthy
If memory serves me, the lands were flooded to some 15 cubits over the tallest mountain. I've forgotten the hight of Ararat, but that's a lot of local, deep water no matter who's version of the cubit you use. What exactly, held it all in place for so long?
Um, you're using a Bible reference to argue my point? Pray, what miracle has happened that you now consider Moses an accurate source of information? A quick bit of spiritual advice on your recent conversion, if I may: Keep a scripture tucked tightly in each ear and your nose into the binding. The less you see and hear of reality, the happier you'll be.
You and I are, both awake (aware), and "have sex with" (know)that? Punctuation and thesauric use of language can bring havoc on an interpretation. I've heard evidence of the Adam and Eve account and the Great Flood story being found in other cultures far away from Judaism. That only supports that the Genesis account is based in folk lore. Lore CAN, however, establish reason that there was indeed a flood, but the details can be subject to cultural influence.
A model of the Ark has been constructed (this is from a TV doc. so I'm lost to give you a nice reference to look at). That model built the Ark as a series of wooden boxes laid end to end. That model survived a violent test scenario.
Here's something that reads like the show presented:
http://www.theoutlaws.com/unexplained10.htm
A scale model of Noah's Ark was taken to a marine laboratory and subjected to the kinds of wave action Noah must have endured. The model sustained simulated 200-foot tidal waves, and it remained exceptionally seaworthy and stable. Furthermore, a professor of hydraulics from San Diego, Dr. Henry Morris, stated that the balance between the buoyant force and the gravitational force would be such that the Ark would right itself if it were tilted anywhere from 0-90 degrees. It would be practically impossible to capsize. Noah's Ark could have withstood the storm's fury.
For the water, we don't know the original salinity of the water. Whatever it was at the beginning of the event, twice the water would have halved the salt content. 3 x Water = 1/3 salinity, 4 x water = 1/4 salinity, etc., since the flood waters were rain and spring water.
quote:
The fossil record is tightly ordered, showing a history that did not include a brief, violent flood event. There are no hominid fossils in context with dinosaurs; no dinos in context with trilobites...
Obiviously the "Flood Fossil Rant" was directed at some opinion other than my own. Yet, it was impressive.
For my case, since fossils are made of stone, I'm going to go out on a limb and say that they didn't float. Further, since the process of evolution is measured in millions of years, the flood is a minute time event in the record. |
|
|
|
Ricky
SFN Die Hard
USA
4907 Posts |
|
|
pspano58
New Member
USA
13 Posts |
Posted - 02/20/2005 : 15:16:51 [Permalink]
|
Okay, I cannot possibly reply to evryone's statements.
By the way, it was not bragging, it was defending.
I was accused of stupidity and ignorance, so I gave the best example I could of how that was not possible. Being proud of yourself is not a sin, and since I am not Catholic, I don't believe in "deadly sins" since that is not in the Bible. All sins are deadly including white lies. That is why we need salvation, because even one sin is enough to put us away from God's presence for eternity.
Okay, sorry for the preaching, but I felt I needed to explain myself.
I am not trying to "prove" creation or "prove" God's existence or for that matter disprove anything.
If you come to the table with a pre-existing belief system, ie the bible or macro-evolution, then you will obviuosly, including myself, look at scientific findings differently. Agreed????
That is logical.
From my point of view, if I believe that God Almighty was running the whole show, whether it be the Flood or anything else for that matter, then NOTHING would be impossible, would it??????
Where the fossils end up, how the ark could have stayed afloat, how they survived, how they cared for the animals: all of these things are moot if you are in the ark with God Almighty, isn't it?????
That's what the bible says, by the way, God said "Come into the ark",
not "Go into the ark".
Can we all at least be intellectually honest with each other?
Based on my pre-conceived beliefs, all the scientific evidence proves is micro-evolution, something that does not show any inconsistency with the bible. As far as defining a "kind" or a "sort" of animal, I am not entirely certain. God said it, so I guess he knows the answer.
However, it seems obvious to me that a dog, a wolf, and a coyote are all the same type or kind of animal. A dog and an elephant would not be.
If you take the bible at it's word, then everything works out just fine except for the "predictions" of an "old" earth. There is where I cannot except conclusions of dating methods for this one simple reason: if you date something where we actually know the age of the sample, it doesn't work. Therefore, how can I trust the results of dating a sample where we DON'T know the actual age. To do so, in my HUMBLE opinion, would be foolish and unscientific. |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 02/20/2005 : 15:33:23 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Can we all at least be intellectually honest with each other?
In order to be intelectually honest with others, you must first be so with yourself.
Anyone who is convinced that evolution is a lie and the earth is less than 10,000 years old is, by definition, intelectually dishonest to themselves.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
Ricky
SFN Die Hard
USA
4907 Posts |
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
Posted - 02/20/2005 : 15:54:01 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by David Mc
quote:
Originally posted by filthy
If memory serves me, the lands were flooded to some 15 cubits over the tallest mountain. I've forgotten the hight of Ararat, but that's a lot of local, deep water no matter who's version of the cubit you use. What exactly, held it all in place for so long?
Um, you're using a Bible reference to argue my point? Pray, what miracle has happened that you now consider Moses an accurate source of information? A quick bit of spiritual advice on your recent conversion, if I may: Keep a scripture tucked tightly in each ear and your nose into the binding. The less you see and hear of reality, the happier you'll be.
You and I are, both awake (aware), and "have sex with" (know)that? Punctuation and thesauric use of language can bring havoc on an interpretation. I've heard evidence of the Adam and Eve account and the Great Flood story being found in other cultures far away from Judaism. That only supports that the Genesis account is based in folk lore. Lore CAN, however, establish reason that there was indeed a flood, but the details can be subject to cultural influence.
A model of the Ark has been constructed (this is from a TV doc. so I'm lost to give you a nice reference to look at). That model built the Ark as a series of wooden boxes laid end to end. That model survived a violent test scenario.
Here's something that reads like the show presented:
http://www.theoutlaws.com/unexplained10.htm
A scale model of Noah's Ark was taken to a marine laboratory and subjected to the kinds of wave action Noah must have endured. The model sustained simulated 200-foot tidal waves, and it remained exceptionally seaworthy and stable. Furthermore, a professor of hydraulics from San Diego, Dr. Henry Morris, stated that the balance between the buoyant force and the gravitational force would be such that the Ark would right itself if it were tilted anywhere from 0-90 degrees. It would be practically impossible to capsize. Noah's Ark could have withstood the storm's fury.
For the water, we don't know the original salinity of the water. Whatever it was at the beginning of the event, twice the water would have halved the salt content. 3 x Water = 1/3 salinity, 4 x water = 1/4 salinity, etc., since the flood waters were rain and spring water.
quote:
The fossil record is tightly ordered, showing a history that did not include a brief, violent flood event. There are no hominid fossils in context with dinosaurs; no dinos in context with trilobites...
Obiviously the "Flood Fossil Rant" was directed at some opinion other than my own. Yet, it was impressive.
For my case, since fossils are made of stone, I'm going to go out on a limb and say that they didn't float. Further, since the process of evolution is measured in millions of years, the flood is a minute time event in the record.
Merely reiterating a proposterous claim. I notice that Henry Morris had his oar in it. As the big honcho of ICR, he is scarcly an objective observer. I'd also like to know where the plans for the model on the ark came from and of what materials were the 'boxes' constrcted.
Morris, by the bye, is the one who said; I paraphrase, "If the data disagrees with my interpretation of Scripture, then those data are flawed."
But the point is moot anyway. It is has been shown that the Flood could not have happened because -- how's your math?
The following is part of a post on the Holysmoke forum by Marty Leipzig PhD, an oilfield geologist, who was having this very same discussion. I have bolded the text in order to make the figures easier to read.
quote:
Dr. Marty Leipzig looks at the mathematics of 'Noah's Flood.'
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 09-02-99 10:11
From: Marty Leipzig
Hey, Georgie. The cretinists at the ICR, AIG, CRC and a half-dozen other fundy-run shill organizations absolutely insist on the Flood of Noah" being global (meaning ALL the world, to your limited deference). To them, your claim that it was local makes you the infidel.
Shocking. When you're obviously nothing more than a nescient schmuck.
Hell, I'm just taking what they claim and agreeing it to death.
Viz:
First- the global flood supposedly (Scripturally) covered the planet, (see that, George? If so, why are you still being so stupid?) and Mount Everest is 8,848 meters tall. The diameter of the earth at the equator, on the other hand, is 12,756.8 km. All we have to do is calculate the volume of water to fill a sphere with a radius of the Earth + Mount Everest; then we subtract the volume of a sphere with a radius of the Earth. Now, I know this won't yield a perfect result, because the Earth isn't a perfect sphere, but it will serve to give a general idea about the amounts involved.
So, here are the calculations:
First, Everest
V= 4/3 * pi * r cubed
= 4/3 * pi * 6387.248 km cubed
= 1.09151 x 10 to the 12 cubic kilometres (1.09151x102 km3)
Now, the Earth at sea level
V = 4/3 * pi * r cubed
= 4/3 * pi * 6378.4 km cubed
= 1.08698 x 10 to the 12 cubic kilometres (1.08698x1012 km3)
The difference between these two figures is the amount of water needed to just cover the Earth:
4.525 x 10 to the ninth cubic kilometres (4.525x1009 km3) Or, to put into a more sensible number, 4,525,000,000,000 cubic kilometres
This is one helluva lot of water.
For those who think it might come from the polar ice caps, please don't forget that water is more dense than ice, and thus that the volume of ice present in those ice caps would have to be more than the volume of water necessary.
Some interesting physical effects of all that water, too. How much weight do you think that is? Well, water at STP weighs in at 1 gram/cubic centimetre (by definition)...so,
4.252x1009 km3 of water,
X 106 (= cubic meters),
X 106 (= cubic centimetres),
X 1 g/cm3 (= grams),
X 10-3 (= kilograms),
(turn the crank)
equals 4.525E+21 kg.
Ever wonder what the effects of that much weight would be? Well, many times in the near past (i.e., the Pleistocene), continental ice sheets covered many of the northern states and most all of Canada. For the sake of argument, let's call the area covered by the Wisconsinian advance (the latest and greatest) was 10,000,000,000 (ten million) km2, by an average thickness of 1 km of ice (a good estimate...it was thicker in some areas [the zones of accumulation] and much thinner elsewhere [at the ablating edges]). Now, 1.00x1007 km2 X 1 km thickness equals 1.00E+07 km3 of ice.
Now, remember earlier that we noted that it would take 4.525x1009 km3 of water for the flood? Well, looking at the Wisconsinian glaciation, all that ice (which is frozen water, remember?) would be precisely 0.222% [...do the math](that's zero decimal two hundred twenty two thousandths) percent of the water needed for the flood.
Well, the Wisconsin |
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist!
|
|
|
|
David Mc
Skeptic Friend
USA
63 Posts |
Posted - 02/20/2005 : 15:56:53 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ricky
When talking about Noah's account of the flood we must use... Noah's account of the flood. What else would you want us to use?
I like the irony of it.
I've put myself in a position of either having to give up on my "Localized Flood" proposal or the complete accuracy of the Bible. Genesis does say that God intended to kill every living creature. I think I'll stick with the localized flood.
quote:
So you are saying that all the salt water fish would have died out?
I don't know about that one. Even fish today, like the salmon, move from salt to fresh water. Sharks have been in fresh water rivers.
Then how can you kill "every living creature"? Plainly, how do you drown a fish, duck, seagul, penguin, seal, walrus, otter, etc. ?
That doesn't exclude the Flood, or God's disappointment with Man, but evidence that it's a story of lore just took another step forward. |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 02/20/2005 : 16:11:30 [Permalink]
|
quote:
I don't know about that one. Even fish today, like the salmon, move from salt to fresh water. Sharks have been in fresh water rivers.
A few species of aquatic animals can survive selenity changes.
But the very large majority cannot.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
Cuneiformist
The Imperfectionist
USA
4955 Posts |
Posted - 02/20/2005 : 16:25:39 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by pspano58
If you take the bible at it's word, then everything works out just fine except for the "predictions" of an "old" earth. There is where I cannot except conclusions of dating methods for this one simple reason: if you date something where we actually know the age of the sample, it doesn't work. Therefore, how can I trust the results of dating a sample where we DON'T know the actual age. To do so, in my HUMBLE opinion, would be foolish and unscientific.
I asked already, but perhaps you missed it. However, since it seems that this is key to your argument, I think you should address it. So, once again: can you provide evidence of your claim that various scientific dating methods don't work when we know the actual age of the sample? |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 02/20/2005 : 16:28:55 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Then how can you kill "every living creature"? Plainly, how do you drown a fish, duck, seagul, penguin, seal, walrus, otter, etc. ?
Starve them of food, remove them from their natural habitat, and take away drinkable water.
All of which a global flood would have done.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
David Mc
Skeptic Friend
USA
63 Posts |
Posted - 02/20/2005 : 17:44:13 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by filthy
I notice that Henry Morris had his oar in it. As the big honcho of ICR, he is scarcly an objective observer. I'd also like to know where the plans for the model on the ark came from and of what materials were the 'boxes' constrcted.
Morris, by the bye, is the one who said; I paraphrase, "If the data disagrees with my interpretation of Scripture, then those data are flawed."
But the point is moot anyway. It is has been shown that the Flood could not have happened because -- how's your math?
First it's Evolution and now you want me to believe in Mt. Everest too???
So it's okay to rule out the flooded world thing, then?
Maybe I was overwhelmed by the equations, but I didn't see a "local flood" reference.
I had to read the 4.5 trillion number a couple of times to make sure I got it right.
I hope you already know how I feel about Dr. Morris' distasteful statement on scripture and data.
Still, if Dr. Morris was involved in the Ark research, the model they presented on the documentary did well. If it worked, it worked. I can't find an online diagram of the boat. I can't discount that what I observed based on his contrary spiritual beliefs.
35 flood stories certainly must point to some universal experience. That's interesting in itself. If we can find that flood, we can narrow down where all of those cultures came from.
There's some suspicion of a Black Sea flood. |
|
|
|
David Mc
Skeptic Friend
USA
63 Posts |
Posted - 02/20/2005 : 17:51:54 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dude
quote:
Then how can you kill "every living creature"? Plainly, how do you drown a fish, duck, seagul, penguin, seal, walrus, otter, etc. ?
Starve them of food, remove them from their natural habitat, and take away drinkable water.
All of which a global flood would have done.
The problem with literal translation, however, is that if only one survived outside of the Ark, it's not true. Which is okay since it's probably and enhanced story anyway. Or it could be the original one and the others are enhanced.
|
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 02/20/2005 : 17:56:51 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by David Mc
I think I'll stick with the localized flood.
Does that mean that Genesis 1 refers to a "localized" Earth, Sun, stars, plants, fish, and animals?quote:
That doesn't exclude the Flood, or God's disappointment with Man, but evidence that it's a story of lore just took another step forward.
And Genesis 1 is still not? |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Ricky
SFN Die Hard
USA
4907 Posts |
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
