Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Several years ago I saw a TV program where biblical scholars looked at a satellite photo showing a dark speck in a mountain range in Turkey. According to the "scholars" that was about the location where the ark would have hit ground as the waters lowered. From that point onward they referred to the dark speck as the ark.
If these scholars were so certain that it was indeed the ark, why didn't they organize an excavation? Or send scientists to recover the ark, study it, and confirm that it is really the ark? Without a doubt it would have been a sensational discovery which would have given the biblical account a whole heap of credibility. Why did they pass up this opportunity? Probably, because they themselves knew it was a folly, and to send an excavation team would have made them look foolish, knowing they wouldn't find anything of importance.
Can you disprove anything mams has said with facts? His answers IN YOUR OPTION are fiction.
Mams hasn't stated any facts. Google the geology of the Andes Mountain Range, check up to see how old those mountains are. Do the same for the Himalaya, The Rock Mountains, the Alps, Urals. I would bet that international geologists would agree these mountain ranges are much older than a few thousand years.
I tend to believe geologists and geo-physicists because their findings are based on years of research, conducting tests, and consulting with educated peers.
Therefore, the biblical account is fiction, no evidence exists. Faith is not a substitute for evidence.
I have more questions; how much manure did all those animals produce daily? What was done with it all? Who shoveled it all?
The life span of some species is much shorter than the time the ark was afloat. Did they reproduce on the ark?
How did Noah keep the carnivores from eating other animals?
Did Noah also bring along mosquitos? Why? It was the golden opportunity to rid the world of those nasty insects.
Certain species eat certain foods. In preparation for the flood Noah must have traveled to Australia to stock up on eucalyptus leaves to feed the koala bears. Or did god have the leaves shipped to Noah by UPS?
I wonder how many ants they took along to feed the anteaters.
Last edited by Visvaldis; 04-15-2008 at 10:55 PM..
Several years ago I saw a TV program where biblical scholars looked at a satellite photo showing a dark speck in a mountain range in Turkey. According to the "scholars" that was about the location where the ark would have hit ground as the waters lowered. From that point onward they referred to the dark speck as the ark.
If these scholars were so certain that it was indeed the ark, why didn't they organize an excavation? Or send scientists to recover the ark, study it, and confirm that it is really the ark? Without a doubt it would have been a sensational discovery which would have given the biblical account a whole heap of credibility. Why did they pass up this opportunity? Probably, because they themselves knew it was a folly, and to send an excavation team would have made them look foolish, knowing they wouldn't find anything of importance.
The ark is located in Turky which is a Moslem country, the real Mt. Sinai is located in a Moslem country as well, and it appears because of the Jewish question the Islamics donot want to reveal evidence that would support the Jewish or Christian faiths. So just like Mt. Sinia, thses sites are kept locked away from Western eyes.
Link to Dr. John Baumgardner who is a PhD in geophysics and space physics and works for the Los Alamos National Laboratory. You want science about the flood, look here.
Link to Dr. John Baumgardner who is a PhD in geophysics and space physics and works for the Los Alamos National Laboratory. You want science about the flood, look here.
Oh but mams, that website mentions the Bible and creation....surely it can't be legitimate or contain anything having to do with "real" science ...
Link to Dr. John Baumgardner who is a PhD in geophysics and space physics and works for the Los Alamos National Laboratory. You want science about the flood, look here.
Thanks for posting the link. I checked it out, plus a few related topics.
I have also received a reprimand for my posting.
Not having a background in geology or physics I can't evaluate the findings of Dr John Baumgardner or any other scientist. But he must be right. That leaves no other recourse except to view the theories of all other "experts" in the field as false.
As such I doubt that anything has been peer reviewed. Not that it makes anything he says wrong.. My point is that I'm doubting that anything on that site has been published as "real" science. "Real" science isn't the presence or absence of "The bible" or "God"...
Just my take though. Although.. give him his dues.. at least he did come out and say that the site in Turkey.. is NOT the Ark. Koodos.
If the entire earth was covered with water from present day sea level to a height that would cover all land masses it would require almost 30,000 feet of water. There is a finite amount of water on the earth and not enough to rise to this height so where did the water come from and where did it go after the flood was over?
I would imagine that the rain was fresh water as opposed to salt water (that's generally what we get in a rainstorm) so what would that do to marine life? Fresh water marine life can't survive in salt water and salt water marine life can't survive in fresh water so this mixing of the oceans with massive amounts of fresh water and then the covering of fresh water lakes and rivers with a deluge of thousands of feet of water should have mixed the salt water with the fresh water and killed off the marine life. How did that work out?
Why is there no geological evidence whatsoever of a worldwide flood?
How did trees, crops, grasses and plants of every kind survive after being under thousands of feet of water?
After the flood had subsided how did the animals on the arc get back home? I don't recall anything in the Bible describing Noah taking kangaroos back to Australia or elephants back to Africa and of course there's millions of species and the Bible says that Noah was over 600 years old at the time so I would imagine that at that age he needed to take a nap now and again.
Just wondering.
You do err because you are trying to understand the flood from you limited perspective.
Since, the tectonic plates were not formed until the "fountains of the deep were broken up", there was no tall mountians then like there are now. So the water level does not need to be as high as you assume (you are reasoning the bible from a unitarian model, if it wont fit this evolutionary system you will reject it. The bible is its own history not subject to man's ideas of what history was). Seccond the bible does not state that the water in the oceans remained at a constant hight with additional rain coming down to flood. So, we can use our minds and think that when the tectonic plate broke into many pieces the cool water of the oceans would have exploded into gizers as the water hit hot magma. These gizers lowered the ocean level thrusting millions of tons of steam into the air. This water condesed and rained on the earth causing the low level land to be easily covered and flooded. This water which came from the oceans returned to the oceans. And post flood there was an Ice age which froze a large portion of this water at the poles. This is what we see today.
The water was steam or distilled water so it was fresh water. This water killed all life on land except those in the ark.
Plants survive just like they do now. Seeds land on soil and a new sprout appears. The rest of the vegitation that was covered by sediment is the fossil fuels which we use today: Coal, oil, natural gas etc...
Why do you think that Noah had to put the animals back? This is a very strange thought almost absurd. All animals were created by God at the begining. The seas teemed with life, the skys teemed with life. All the land animals died in the flood. So the Animals that came off the ark migrated to the locations that you find them today. Kangaroos were not necessarily in austrailia before the flood but may have been.
Funny how there is no geological evidence to support the theory of a great flood happening anywhere near the time the bible said it did. And there is geological evidence going back millions of years - but nothing showing the results of a flood of that magnitude.
Funny how there is no geological evidence to support the theory of a great flood happening anywhere near the time the bible said it did. And there is geological evidence going back millions of years - but nothing showing the results of a flood of that magnitude.
It's funny how fictional stories and folkclores can become reality after they're hammered into people's heads for centuries going. The bible was a fun story, (for me) for those who take it literally... you really need to dig deeper for some hard evidence. (which will never surface, because it's all fiction.)
and for those who will argue that god can create his own history, well then, aren't you built in god's image! (the opposite being true: isn't god built to your own image...)
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
...
) so what would that do to marine life? Fresh water marine life can't survive in salt water and salt water marine life can't survive in fresh water so this mixing of the oceans with massive amounts of fresh water and then the covering of fresh water lakes and rivers with a deluge of thousands of feet of water should have mixed the salt water with the fresh water and killed off the marine life. How did that work out? 
