Wick Stick
Well-Known Member
That... isn't an endorsement. I'm a little unclear what your position is here.
Was Noah's flood global?
- Thread starter TonyChanYT
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
taking 16,000 animals from YEC sources. Divided by 8 people.
Means each person will have to care for 2,000 daily.
24 hours minus 9 hours for each person leaves them 15 hours to care for animals.
Means each person would care for 134 animals per hour.
60 min divided by 134 means they would have have 44 seconds per animal.
Go ahead, try this simple math for their higher estimate of 25,000 animals.
Means each person will have to care for 2,000 daily.
24 hours minus 9 hours for each person leaves them 15 hours to care for animals.
Means each person would care for 134 animals per hour.
60 min divided by 134 means they would have have 44 seconds per animal.
Go ahead, try this simple math for their higher estimate of 25,000 animals.
How did Noah fit all the animals on the Ark? | GotQuestions.org
How did Noah fit all the animals on the Ark? How could Noah’s Ark possibly hold all the animals and enough food to feed them all?
www.gotquestions.org
Wick Stick
Well-Known Member
If you start in a junkyard, you shouldn't be surprised to find trash.
It was most likely the flood that killed off the dinosaurs. I watched a scientific documentation that showed faults in carbon dating and showed that some of the dinosaur fossils found could only have been created in a flooding condition.
Sorry, I wasn't pointing the finger at the forum members. I accidentally wrote "others" instead of "authors" I fixed the post.
Let proposition P1 = Noah's flood was global.
P2 = Noah's flood was not global but regional.
Between 0 and 10, how much weight do you put on each of the above propositions? The stronger your belief in a proposition, the higher the weight.
They have now found bone marrow in T-Rex skeletons that are supposedly billions of years old. And they have found vertically deposited dinosaur skeletons that are in the layers of what is supposed to take billions of years. But fossilization requires that the dinosaur must be buried rapidly otherwise there would be nothing left from air decay.
Dinosaur Shocker
Local Flood
The highly energetic geological processes inevitably accompanying the Genesis Flood must have generated an enormous heat load without raising environmental temperatures beyond biological endurance limits.
...
Since there is no unanimity in Flood modelling in present-day creation science, it is useful to choose a reference model framework. For this purpose the Catastrophic Plate Tectonics (CPT) model is the natural choice as the most widely accepted and most highly developed Flood model among creation scientists; indeed it is the only model which has been subject to serious quantitative investigation.
...
Heat Problems Associated with Genesis Flood Models—Part 4: Heat Deposited by Magmatic Activity
In Part 4 of this series key sources of Flood heat are identified. The primary concern is with the heat deposited as a result of Flood and post-Flood magmatic activity.
answersresearchjournal.org
NOAH'S FLOOD, JOSHUA'S LONG DAY, AND LUCIFER'S FALL---What Really Happened?
By: Woodrow, Ralph
bibleinterp.arizona.edu
By: Woodrow, Ralph
Forget about Noah's Ark; There Was No Worldwide Flood | Bible Interp
bibleinterp.arizona.edu
The numbers are from Young Earth Creationists.
What does your souces say? links please.
Wick Stick
Well-Known Member
I already posted this earlier...
https://biblicalstudies.org.uk/pdf/churchman/044-02_139.pdf
It's about 8 pages, but the gist is that Noah's flood was likely regional and caused by an overflow of water from Lake Van running down the Tigris/Euphrates.
Here's another, showing that the Bible story uses a bunch of symbolism centered around the phenomenon of gestation and birth...
https://isac.uchicago.edu/sites/default/files/uploads/shared/docs/as27.pdf
The 7-page article starts on page 213.
carbon dating is not used alone, other methods are used along with it.
Also, many of the claims against it are poor science.
Does Radiocarbon Dating Prove a Young Earth? A Response to Vernon R. Cupps
In my experience, one of the most persuasive scientific claims for a young Earth is the detection of carbon-14 in geological samples such as coal and fossilized dinosaur remains.
reasons.org
Recalibration is the biggest shake-up in the carbon dating world for seven years
Overhaul will improve accuracy and push back how far samples can be dated by 5000 years
www.chemistryworld.com
Answers to Creationist Attacks on Carbon-14 Dating | National Center for Science Education
Radiocarbon dating can easily establish that humans have been on the earth for over twenty thousand years, at least twice as long as creationists are willing to allow.
Dating Methods:
How Old is the Earth? | National Center for Science Education
The age of the Earth is 4.54 billion years (Ga or Gyr), a number which geologists have determined by several independent methods. Because of the recycling of crustal rocks by plate tectonics, no direct material from the earliest Earth still exists.
Misconception Monday: How Old Is That Fossil in the Window? Part 1 | National Center for Science Education
After my three-parter on fossils, I was sure you'd be sick of them, but there was a request (seconded by a few people) to talk about one particular aspect of paleontology that I didn’t cover yet: How do you know how old a fossil is? It turns out to be a pretty interesting question...
Past Imperfect: Scientific Creationism and Prehistoric Archeology | National Center for Science Education
This article explores one aspect of "scientific" creationism and suggests that it illustrates an important general point about that enterprise.
Thanks, I am glad he is doing very well. He was in one my classes decades ago. YES
Look up "ringwoodite". There's your missing water -- about 3x the amount in all the oceans combined worth."Mount Everest, which is 29,028 feet tall and getting a bit taller every day, with 22 feet of water.
...
The earth has a radius of 3959 miles. Now we need to know the radius of the flood. That’s the earth radius, plus the height of Everest, plus 15 cubits (22ft). So 3959 miles + 29,028 ft +22 feet = 3959 miles + 29050 feet = 3959 miles + 5.5018939 miles = 3964.5018939 miles
If we plug those two radii in to our volume formula, we get the volumes:
259,923,241,564 miles³ for the volume of the earth.
261,008,408,332 miles³ for the volume of the earth at flood.
So, if we subtract the earth volume from the flood volume, we’ll get the volume of water required to fill that space. That’s how much it would need to rain. That turns out to be 1,085,166,768 miles³of rain.
Now, let’s cut that by 25% because land, mountains, etc. occupy some of that volume. All that space would not be filled with water. The 25% figure is generous since oceans, which by definition sit at sea level, cover 70% of the earth and the rest of the earth isn’t nearly as high as Everest. But let’s grant the creationist this small charity.
Let’s try to put that in another perspective. The Atlantic Ocean is about 80,000,000 miles³.
That means, there needed to be more water than could be contained by ten Atlantic Oceans to rain as much as the bible claims."
Wick Stick
Well-Known Member
Who? Robert Biggs?
Probably not F.A. Molony since I think he's been dead a long time. Probably not Anne Kilmer since you said "he."
The whole earth may have been what was known of the whole earth at that time. We talk like that even today when we say all the people came to the company party. That means all the people who works there and not all the people in the world.
Truthnightmare
Well-Known Member
I can see why you believe the flood was worldwide, however, taking all into account it was probably local.
Truth7t7
Well-Known Member
- Jan 2, 2014
- 10,865
- 3,278
- 113
- Faith
- Christian
- Country
- United States
"Every Living Substance" was destroyed on the earth, it doesn't state "Parts of the earth"
They were destroyed from the earth, very simple and easy to understand
Only that within the ark remained alive, "A Global Event"
Genesis 7:4 & 19-24KJV
4 For yet seven days, and I will cause it to rain upon the earth forty days and forty nights; and every living substance that I have made will I destroy from off the face of the earth.
19 And the waters prevailed exceedingly upon the earth; and all the high hills, that were under the whole heaven, were covered.
20 Fifteen cubits upward did the waters prevail; and the mountains were covered.
21 And all flesh died that moved upon the earth, both of fowl, and of cattle, and of beast, and of every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth, and every man:
22 All in whose nostrils was the breath of life, of all that was in the dry land, died.
23 And every living substance was destroyed which was upon the face of the ground, both man, and cattle, and the creeping things, and the fowl of the heaven; and they were destroyed from the earth: and Noah only remained alive, and they that were with him in the ark.
24 And the waters prevailed upon the earth an hundred and fifty days.
Last edited:
"The one thing we know for sure from geology is that a global flood never happened," said David Montgomery, a professor of geomorphology at the University of Washington in Seattle and author of "The Rocks Don't Lie: A Geologist Investigates Noah's Flood" (W. W. Norton & Company, 2012). "If you look at it as literally a global flood that covered the world's highest mountains, I'm sorry, there's just not enough water on Earth to do that."
If the "heavens" opened and all of the water in the atmosphere came down at once as rain, the planet would be submerged — but only to a depth of about 1 inch (2.5 centimeters), according to the U.S. Geological Survey. That's not enough water to justify a canoe, let alone a massive ark.
Similar threads
