[cryptic.paintball]

Lately I have been noticing creationists bringing up the flood to "prove" or validate an argument they are debating. To silence this and end the myth of the global flood I present this thread. If you believe it to be true I challange you to answer these questions with science and not the typical "god did it" answer.

Qestions taken from here & cleaned upClick me


#1.) Where did the Flood water come from, and where did it go?

#2.) If there was a vapor canopy, how was the water suspended, and what caused it to fall all at once when it did?

#3.) If there was a vapor canopy a part of the atmosphere, how would it not raise the atmospheric pressure accordingly, raising oxygen and nitrogen levels to toxic levels?

#4.) If the water canopy began as ice in orbit, how would the gravitational potential energy not raise the temperature past boiling?

#5.) How would a vapor canopy refrain from blocking enough sunlight to reduce the the earth's temperature greatly?

#6.) How would a vapor canopy remain intact above the ozone layer as UV radiation would invariably break apart water molecules?

#7.) If there was a hydroplate (Flood waters coming from a layer of water underground, released by a catastrophic rupture of the earth's crust, shot above the atmosphere, and fell as rain.) how was the water contained?

#8.) If there was a hydroplate, how was the water not superheated?

#9.) If there was a hydroplate, where is the evidence? Fissures? Deposits?

#10.) If the global flood water came from an ice comet, how was it not superheated as it entered the atmosphere?

#11.) How do you explain the relative ages of mountains? For example, why weren't the Sierra Nevadas eroded as much as the Appalachians during the Flood?

#12.) Why is there no evidence of a flood in ice core series?

#13.) How are the polar ice caps even possible? Such a mass of water as the Flood would have provided sufficient buoyancy to float the polar caps off their beds and break them up, how are they still intact?

#14.) Why did the Flood not leave traces on the sea floors? A year long flood should be recognizable in sea bottom cores by (1) an uncharacteristic amount of terrestrial detritus, (2) different grain size distributions in the sediment, (3) a shift in oxygen isotope ratios (rain has a different isotopic composition from seawater), (4) a massive extinction, and (n) other characters. Why do none of these show up?

#15.) Why is there no evidence of a flood in tree ring dating?

#16.) Why are geological eras consistent worldwide? How do you explain worldwide agreement between "apparent" geological eras and several different (independent) radiometric and nonradiometric dating methods?

#17.) How was the fossil record sorted in an order convenient for evolution? #18.) Why didn't at least one dinosaur make it to the high ground with the elephants?

#18.) Why are organisms (such as brachiopods) which are very similar hydrodynamically (all nearly the same size, shape, and weight) still perfectly sorted?

#19.) How are coral reefs hundreds of feet thick and miles long were preserved intact with other fossils below them?

#20.) How did sensitive marine life such as coral survive?

#21.) Why do small organisms dominate the lower strata, whereas fluid mechanics says they would sink slower and thus end up in upper strata?

#22.) Why are there no human artifacts found except in the very uppermost strata? If, at the time of the Flood, the earth was overpopulated by people with technology for shipbuilding, why were none of their tools or buildings mixed with trilobite or dinosaur fossils?

#23.) Why is ecological information is consistent within but not between layers? Fossil pollen is one of the more important indicators of different levels of strata. Each plant has different and distinct pollen, and, by telling which plants produced the fossil pollen, it is easy to see what the climate was like in different strata. Was the pollen hydraulically sorted by the flood water so that the climatic evidence is different for each layer?

#24.) Deep in the geologic column there are formations which could have originated only on the surface, such as: rain drops, river channels, wind-blown dunes, beaches, glacial deposits, burrows, in-place trees, soil, desiccation cracks, footprints, meteorites, meteor craters, coral reefs, and cave systems. How do surface features appear far from the surface? How could these have appeared in the midst of a catastrophic flood?

#25.) How does a global flood explain angular unconformities?

#26.) How were mountains and valleys formed?

#27.) When did granite batholiths form?

#28.) How can a single flood be responsible for such extensively detailed layering?

#29.) How do you explain the formation of varves?

#30.) Where did all of the heat go? The geologic record includes roughly 8 x 10^24 grams of lava flows and igneous intrusions. Assuming (conservatively) a specific heat of 0.15, this magma would release 5.4 x 10^27 joules while cooling 1100 degrees C. In addition, the heat of crystallization as the magma solidifies would release a great deal more heat. There are roughly 5 x 10^23 grams of limestone in the earth's sediments, and the formation of calcite releases about 11,290 joules/gram. If only 10% of the limestone were formed during the Flood, the 5.6 x 10^26 joules of heat released would be enough to boil the flood waters. Erosion and crustal movements have erased an unknown number of impact craters on earth, but Creationists Whitcomb and DeYoung suggest that cratering to the extent seen on the Moon and Mercury occurred on earth during the year of Noah's Flood. The heat from just one of the largest lunar impacts released an estimated 3 x 10^26 joules; the same sized object falling to earth would release even more energy. 5.6 x 10^26 joules is enough to heat the oceans to boiling. 3.7 x 10^27 joules will vaporize them completely. Since steam and air have a lower heat capacity than water, the steam released will quickly raise the temperature of the atmosphere over 1000 C. At these temperatures, much of the atmosphere would boil off the Earth. So where did all of the heat go?

#31.) How were limestone deposits formed?

#32.) How could a flood have deposited chalk?

#33.) How could the Flood deposit layers of solid salt?

#34.) How were sedimentary deposits recrystallized and plastically deformed in the short time since the Flood?

#35.) How were hematite layers laid down?

#36.) How do you explain fossil mineralization?

#37.) How did all the modern plant species survive?

#38.) How did all the fish survive?

#39.) How did diseases survive?

[cryptic.paintball]

#40.) How did short-lived species survive? Adult mayflies on the ark would have died in a few days, and the larvae of many mayflies require shallow fresh running water. Many other insects would face similar problems.

#41.) How could more than a handful of species survive in a devastated habitat? The Flood would have destroyed the food and shelter which most species need to survive.

#42.) How did predators survive?

#43.) How could more than a handful of species survive random influences that affect populations?

#44.) What kinds were aboard the ark?

#45.) Were dinosaurs and other extinct animals on the ark?

#46.) Were the animals aboard the ark mature?

#47.) How many clean animals were on the ark?

#48.) An ark of the size specified in the Bible would not be large enough to carry a cargo of animals and food sufficient to repopulate the earth, especially if animals that are now extinct were required to be aboard. So, could they all fit?

#49.) Many animals, especially insects, require special diets. Koalas, for example, require eucalyptus leaves, and silkworms eat nothing but mulberry leaves. For thousands of plant species (perhaps even most plants), there is at least one animal that eats only that one kind of plant. How did Noah gather all those plants aboard, and where did he put them?

#50.) Other animals are strict carnivores, and some of those specialize on certain kinds of foods, such as small mammals, insects, fish, or aquatic invertebrates. How did Noah determine and provide for all those special diets?

#51.) Many animals require their food to be fresh. Many snakes, for example, will eat only live foods (or at least warm and moving). Parasitoid wasps only attack living prey. Most spiders locate their prey by the vibrations it produces. Most herbivorous insects require fresh food. Aphids, in fact, are physically incapable of sucking from wilted leaves. How did Noah keep all these food supplies fresh?

#52.) How did Noah keep pests from consuming most of the food?

#53.) The ark would need to be well ventilated to disperse the heat, humidity, and waste products (including methane, carbon dioxide, and ammonia) from the many thousands of animals which were crowded aboard. How was fresh air circulated throughout the structure?

#54.) The ungulates alone would have produced tons of manure a day. The waste on the lowest deck at least (and possibly the middle deck) could not simply be pushed overboard, since the deck was below the water line; the waste would have to be carried up a deck or two. Vermicomposting could reduce the rate of waste accumulation, but it requires maintenance of its own. How did such a small crew dispose of so much waste?

#55.) he animals aboard the ark would have been in very poor shape unless they got regular exercise. (Imagine if you had to stay in an area the size of a closet for a year.) How were several thousand diverse kinds of animals exercised regularly?

#56.) How did a crew of eight manage a menagerie larger and more diverse than that found in zoos requiring many times that many employees?

#57.) Wood is not the best material for shipbuilding. It is not enough that a ship be built to hold together; it must also be sturdy enough that the changing stresses don't open gaps in its hull. Wood is simply not strong enough to prevent separation between the joints, especially in the heavy seas that the Ark would have encountered. The longest wooden ships in modern seas are about 300 feet, and these require reinforcing with iron straps and leak so badly they must be constantly pumped. The ark was 450 feet long [ Gen. 6:15]. How could an ark that size be made seaworthy?

[cryptic.paintball]

#58.) If the animals traveled from other parts of the world, many of them would have faced extreme difficulties. Sloths and penguins, can't travel overland very well at all, koalas and many insects, require a special diet, how did they bring it along? Some cave-dwelling arthropods can't survive in less than 100% relative humidity. Some, like dodos, must have lived on islands. If they didn't, they would have been easy prey for other animals. So how did the animals get to the ark from elsewhere?

#59.) Some creationists suggest that the animals need not have traveled far to reach the Ark; a moderate climate could have made it possible for all of them to live nearby all along. However, this proposal makes matters even worse. The last point above would have applied not only to island species, but to almost all species. Competition between species would have driven most of them to extinction. So, how could animals have all lived near Noah?

#60.) How was the Ark loaded? Getting all the animals aboard the Ark presents logistical problems which, while not impossible, are highly impractical. Noah had only seven days to load the Ark (Gen. 7:4-10). If only 15764 animals were aboard, one animal must have been loaded every 38 seconds, without letup. Since there were likely more animals to load, the time pressures would have been even worse. How was this achieved?

#61.) How did animals get to their present ranges? How did koalas get from Ararat to Australia, polar bears to the Arctic, etc., when the kinds of environment they require to live doesn't exist between the two points. How did so many unique species get to remote islands?

#62.) How were ecological interdependencies preserved as animals migrated from Ararat?

#63.) Why is there no mention of the Flood in the records of Egyptian or Mesopotamian civilizations which existed at the time?

#64.) How did the human population rebound so fast?

#65.) Why do other flood myths vary so greatly from the Genesis account?



Ed Babinski, B.S., biology

the "Flood" would have had to have piled sediments at an average depth of one mile over all the earth, keeping a multitude of micro-fossils, fossil fragments, trace fossils, and species ALL arranged in extraordinarily good relative order of deposition, and without smudging together the coal seams of Kent with the great white cliff chalk of Dover.

Then those sediments would have to harden into rock overnight. Let me give one example of why that must be so. Sedimentary rock does not harden overnight the silica takes time to bond. Some strata contain boulders that lie on a geological horizon yet do not sink below that horizon, in other words that horizon had to have hardened before the boulder rolled on top of it. This is not a problem for modern geology, because rivers can move boulders, but when "Flood geologists" encounter such a deposit, they have to admit that at least some time passed between the hardening of that strata and the arrival of the boulder to rest on top of it, yet not SINK INTO IT. Moreover, boulders often are conglomerates, rocks that contain rocks inside them, and those rocks that are inside the conglomerate boulder can be cracked open, and you can find, guess what, fossils. I'm not even going to go into the mental gyrations needed to account for all of this as the result merely of a one-year long "Flood."

"Paleosols" are ancient soils that develop during periods of extensive sub-areal weathering and they are sometimes preserved in the geologic record. Paleosols are found throughout the geologic column and represent periods of Earth history when the region they were found in was not covered by water. Paleosols in the midst of a global flood are not possible. (Joseph Meert, "Radiometric Dating, Paleosols and the Geologic Column: Three strikes against Young Earth Creationism" - original Verison Fall 1999, Updated July 3, 2002)

CHALK UP ANOTHER VOTE FOR AN OLD EARTH
Anyone who believes the earth is only six thousand years old and Noah's Flood formed the geologic record has to explain why there are layers of limestone and/or chalk many feet thick found in that record. Such layers are composed of countless generations of microscopic shelled organisms that used to live near the surface of the water (as their cousins do today), enjoying the sunlight, multiplying, sucking minerals from the water to form their tiny shells, then dying. Afterwards their remains settled to the bottom (microscopic shells do not settle rapidly). Thick layers of such organisms began appearing for the first time during the Cretaceous era (the whole era was named after "chalk"). Trying to imagine enough microscopic organisms living all at once and then dying suddenly to form such thick densely packed layers (rather than the process taking countless generations) is so improbable as to be impossible. Keep in mind their modern day cousins only live close to the surface of the water, they need sunlight and cannot live in thick layers that block light from each other, and sunlight dims quickly as you proceed deeper into the water. Keep in mind the time it takes to grow and suck the necessary minerals out of the water, and add the time needed to settle to the bottom. Moreover, for the "Flood" hypothesis to be true, these microscopic organisms would have had to have dropped miraculously fast, faster than far denser organisms and coarser heavier sediments lying today in strata above them, not to mention the tracks of reptiles, dinosaurs, and other animals lying above them. If these microorganisms settled so quickly, it's also a miracle that there is no bleeding of chalk into the formations above and below such layers.

Even more difficult to reconcile with a young earth are layers of "pelletized limestone" many feet thick. The "pellets" consist of ancient feces left by fish that ate the microscopic shelled organisms, and then excreted them as pellets. Keep in mind all the time factors I mentioned above but also add the time it would take that many fish to multiply and eat that many microscopic shelled organisms and then defecate them out again in formations of pelletized limestone many feet thick. (Maybe they could have defecated all those pellets at once, many feet thick, if the fish were "frightened to death" by "the Flood?")

Just a few exapmles of why the global flood story are untrue:

1. The dates of a number of ancient cultures (i.e.Egypt and Mesopotamia) have been established by the analysis of historical documents supported by dating to be older than the alleged date of the Flood.

2. The flood, had it occurred, should also have produced large-scale effects spread throughout the entire world. Erosion should be evenly distributed, yet the levels of erosion in, for example, the Appalachians and the Rocky Mountains differ significantly.

3. Geochronology is the science of determining the absolute age of rocks, fossils, and sediments by a variety of techniques. These methods indicate that the Earth as a whole is at least 4.5 billion years old, and that the strata that, according to flood geology, were laid down during the Flood 6000 years ago, were actually deposited gradually over many millions of years.

4. If the flood were responsible for fossilization, then all the animals now fossilized must have been living together on the Earth just before the flood. carbonate hardgrounds and the fossils associated with them show that the so-called flood sediments include evidence of long hiatuses in deposition not consistent with flood dynamics or timing.

[cuttlefish32]

I think you've won this argument, unless creationists simply reply "if God wills it..."

[cryptic.paintball]

And just to make sure this is coverered:

Gilgamesh

Predates christianity br 5,000 years at early estimates.

The Genesis story describes how mankind had become obnoxious to God; they were hopelessly sinful and wicked. In the Babylonian story, they were too numerous and noisy.
The Gods (or God) decided to send a worldwide flood. This would drown men, women, children, babies and infants, as well as eliminate all of the land animals and birds.
The Gods (or God) knew of one righteous man, Ut-Napishtim or Noah.
The Gods (or God) ordered the hero to build a multi-story wooden ark (called a chest or box in the original Hebrew).
The hero initially complained about the assignment to build the boat
The ark would be sealed with pitch.
The ark would have with many internal compartments
It would have a single door
It would have at least one window.
The ark was built and loaded with the hero, a few other humans, and samples from all species of other land animals.
A great rain covered the land with water.
The mountains were initially covered with water.
The ark landed on a mountain in the Middle East.
The hero sent out birds at regular intervals to find if any dry land was in the vicinity.
The first two birds returned to the ark. The third bird apparently found dry land because it did not return.
The hero and his family left the ark, ritually killed an animal, offered it as a sacrifice.
God (or the Gods in the Epic of Gilgamesh) smelled the roasted meat of the sacrifice.
The hero was blessed.
The Babylonian gods seemed genuinely sorry for the genocide that they had created. The God of Noah appears to have regretted his actions as well, because he promised never to do it again.

[hsilman]

or, can we talk about how biblical etymology doesn't support a global flood?

If we even accept that Moses was the author of the first few books, I have been trending towards the idea that unless it was first-hand knowledge, things could have gotten lost in translation between God and him as to what happened. Think about the complexities of explaining the internet, or a car, to someone from the 1700s. Now think about explaining the origins of the universe to a guy who doesn't even know algebra.

might be kind of hard to comprehend.

[warbeak2099]

Originally Posted by hsilman

or, can we talk about how biblical etymology doesn't support a global flood?

If we even accept that Moses was the author of the first few books, I have been trending towards the idea that unless it was first-hand knowledge, things could have gotten lost in translation between God and him as to what happened. Think about the complexities of explaining the internet, or a car, to someone from the 1700s. Now think about explaining the origins of the universe to a guy who doesn't even know algebra.

might be kind of hard to comprehend.

Thanks for giving the message to an incompetent and then expecting us to understand and believe your religion God.

[hsilman]

that's...not what I was insinuating at all. Personally, I don't believe the "how things got to this point" part of the message is particularly important.

[Laureate]

Originally Posted by hsilman

or, can we talk about how biblical etymology doesn't support a global flood?

If we even accept that Moses was the author of the first few books, I have been trending towards the idea that unless it was first-hand knowledge, things could have gotten lost in translation between God and him as to what happened. Think about the complexities of explaining the internet, or a car, to someone from the 1700s. Now think about explaining the origins of the universe to a guy who doesn't even know algebra.

might be kind of hard to comprehend.

What is the point of religion if everything got ****ed up?

Edit: blahblahblahabahhablh there is an endless amount of problems with your statement

[warbeak2099]

Originally Posted by hsilman

that's...not what I was insinuating at all. Personally, I don't believe the "how things got to this point" part of the message is particularly important.

You said Moses probably misunderstood what God was saying because he didn't have the intellectual tools we have today to understand the story. So God deliberately handed the story down to a person who he knew wouldn't be able to get it right, and then expects us to buy it.

[hsilman]

Originally Posted by Laureate

What is the point of religion if everything got ****ed up?

Edit: blahblahblahabahhablh there is an endless amount of problems with your statement

there aren't problems if someone doesn't believe there is a point to religion. Jesus' message isn't a religion.

beak: I'm saying how it got to this point isn't central to the message. he didn't "**** up", but going into how the creation story fits with modern scientific knowledge will just lead to someone syaing its all metaphorical yadda yadda, so its not a worthwhile discussion.

[Laureate]

Originally Posted by hsilman

that's...not what I was insinuating at all. Personally, I don't believe the "how things got to this point" part of the message is particularly important.

THAN WHAT IS THE POINT OF SPENDING ALL OF THOSE PAGES TALKING ABOUT IT?!?!

What is the point in that not being the true message if only .17% of the people who follow the religion get the true meaning?

[warbeak2099]

Originally Posted by hsilman

Jesus' message isn't a religion.

Well, the part where he says, I am the son of God, you must believe in me to get to Heaven, is kind of a religious statement lol.

[RamboPreacher]

yep - CP "won", by cut/pasting (and "cleaning up") from a website or few.
/thread

[Laureate]

Originally Posted by warbeak2099

You said Moses probably misunderstood what God was saying because he didn't have the intellectual tools we have today to understand the story. So God deliberately handed the story down to a person who he knew wouldn't be able to get it right, and then expects us to buy it.

BINGBINGBINGBINGBING

[Laureate]

Originally Posted by RamboPreacher

yep - CP won, by cut/pasting (and "cleaning up") from a website or few.
/thread

what? who cares if he got them from a different website? that does not make the questions illegitimate.

[RamboPreacher]

didn't say they were illegitimate questions. just agreeing that he apparently "won" by posting them

[Laureate]

Originally Posted by RamboPreacher

didn't say they were illegitimate questions. just agreeing that he apparently "won" by posting them

so you are admitting loss?

[warbeak2099]

Well the facts and questions he posted certainly kill the idea of a worldwide flood. But they certainly don't disprove the possibility of the story being about a regional flood. The Tigris and Euphrates could easily have been the subject of the story, recorded by someone who probably didn't have the best understanding of geology. There is no reason the story couldn't have been the product of an ancient people's wild imagination at the witnessing of a natural occurrence.

[hsilman]

Originally Posted by Laureate

THAN WHAT IS THE POINT OF SPENDING ALL OF THOSE PAGES TALKING ABOUT IT?!?!

What is the point in that not being the true message if only .17% of the people who follow the religion get the true meaning?

about .17% of the text(obviously sarcastic) is used discussing the creation story.

if only a small percentage of the world "gets it", that's not really the fault of the text, they are all reading the same thing. the massage is pretty simple, and I don't understand the contention everyone has with it. It's not like the religion says you are punished for eternity(though translations differ and such). If you want to be with God, here's how. If not, then when you die, that's it. This whole "holding a gun(hell) to your head to make you believe" nonsense is all political crap and not at all the message of the text.

saying "this is how you get to be with the being that created everything" is certainly a spiritual statement, but "religion" entails a lot of other crap that isn't part of that statement.

[Laureate]

Originally Posted by warbeak2099

Well the facts and questions he posted certainly kill the idea of a worldwide flood. But they certainly don't disprove the possibility of the story being about a regional flood. The Tigris and Euphrates could easily have been the subject of the story, recorded by someone who probably didn't have the best understanding of geology. There is no reason the story couldn't have been the product of an ancient people's wild imagination at the witnessing of a natural occurrence.

Yeah, I think they actually proved there was a flood in the Mesopotamia.