Creationists PWNED

[Gibsie]

Wouldn't such fast plate movements result in catastrophic side effects for the rest of the planet? Like the tsunami disaster x100000?

[trev]

Wouldn't such fast plate movements result in catastrophic side effects for the rest of the planet? Like the tsunami disaster x100000?

Yes it would, but the tsunami did not affect ships at sea, and with all human and animal life cocooned in the ark, they were safe. Later the boat landed somewhere in the mountains of ararat and again they would have been safe from tsanamis because of their high altitude. It would have taken many years for the human race to multiply and recolonise coastal areas, and by then the tectonic activity would have subsided. It is interesting that there were periods in earths ancient history where many people resided in caves etc, this could equate to the early turbulent years after the flood when buildings would not remain standing due to frequent severe earthquakes

[Whaleboy]

But didn't you say that the seas would have been shallow? Shallow such that tsnuamis would have been insanely powerful? Furthermore, what of the oceanic basins? Also, what of the varying magnetic field of the Earth, preserving itself in the rocks of the mid Atlantic ridge in a series of bands of alternating North-South inclination each representing (by radioactive decay and the current rate of formation) tens of thousands of years of deposition. And if you're claiming that the Earth's magnetic field would switch quickly and volcanoes would erupt quickly, how then can you account for the non-fatal levels of carbonic acid in the ocean, and the fact that 99% of life on earth wasn't nuked by frequent switching of the Earth's magnetic field. What of the evidence of geological activity from eons ago.

You cannot seriously be suggesting that you believe in the biblical account of Noahs flood, and that it was the cause, or related to the cause of all the geology we see before us? . If so, seek help.

[MRT144]

whaleboy, dont you realize that most people from australia and new zealand are generally ignorant about everything other than dingos?

[trev]

If so, seek help.

I have, God is my helper, do you have a helper?

Shallow such that tsnuamis would have been insanely powerful?

Shallower for sure, but if it was 20% shallower than present (A figure that would allow the flood waters that covered a relatively flat world to change the oceans to its current depth), majority of the oceans would be deep enough to allow the tsanami to travel unobstructed through the water as it did this time through the great expanse of the Indian Ocean.

how then can you account for the non-fatal levels of carbonic acid in the ocean

The fossil evidence of major fish burials suggest that it was indeed fatal to much of marine life, but a renmant of marine life survived, and this is indeed normal in instances of poisoning,(a few germs always survive a course of antibiotics for example)

Also, what of the varying magnetic field of the Earth, preserving itself in the rocks of the mid Atlantic ridge in a series of bands of alternating North-South inclination each representing (by radioactive decay and the current rate of formation) tens of thousands of years of deposition.

I disagree that the current rate of formation is consistent with past rates as is well known by my earlier posts, and in the turbulence of tectonics that affected the whole globe at the time of Noahs flood, there would have been major, frequent changes in magnetic fields, including eddies in the magnetic fields that would be localised in effect, ie the swings in the N Atlantic ridge would not necessarily mean a full global change in magnetic fields.

[Last Conformist]

@trev: I'll take your failure to address the point about the water rasing above the mountains as indicative of you being an unbelieving heathen bound for hell.

[trev]

@trev: I'll take your failure to address the point about the water rasing above the mountains as indicative of you being an unbelieving heathen bound for hell.

I have addressed that point by stating that the world was relatively flat prior to Noahs flood, and mountains of todays scale did not exist, in fact if the biblical climate record is correct they could not have existed, mountain ranges would not have allowed a climate of the type described in the bible. The low hills/mountains of preflood time were covered by the flood waters. As it is prophesied that in Revelations near the end that the earth will be flattened by an earthquake at the end of time, so that no hills/mountains will exist after that time, I believe if God can flatten the world by an earthquake, he can also have created the mountains by an earthquake at the completion of the flood

[Last Conformist]

You're seriously telling me that the "high mountains" refered to in Gen. 7:20 were perhaps 100m high?

Revisionist.

[trev]

You're seriously telling me that the "high mountains" refered to in Gen. 7:20 were perhaps 100m high?

Yes, the region were I lived had a series of 'mountains', ie highest hills for 50 miles or more, they have names Mt Burr, Mt Benson etc and range from less than 100m to maybe for the highest 150m (probably less). The term high is always relative to nearby surroundings and therefore can be used on mountains others would consider a rock pile, if nothing else is higher.

[Last Conformist]

You should take a chat with some real bible scholars some day.

[Boris Godunov]

Good grief, trev... could you possibly be this naive? Again, you throw our explanations without even thinking of the scientific plausibility of them. Your explanations cause worse problems than the flood!

If you won't address all the above cited contradictions to the Flood, I don't see how this discussion can be productive. So far you've not provided a lick of proof for any of your suggestions, and have had no response for the portions of your explanations that have been shown to be patently impossible, which makes your entire "theory" as it were fall apart.

The "mountains made by the flood" suggestion is absurd. Nothing in Genesis suggests the earth was flat and there were no mountains. Nothing suggests there was no rain fall. This is just apologetics taken to the ludicrous extreme.

http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CH/CH570.html

This claim originated before the theory of plate tectonics existed as an explanation for mountain-building. Plate tectonics, however, solved the problem in terms of relatively gradual processes we see working (and still building mountains) today. All the major mountain ranges have been studied in detail, the plate movements which caused them have been mapped, their histories have been worked out for millions of years in the past. The problem of mountain formation has been solved, and a Flood had no part the solution.

The catastrophic formation of mountains and subsequent return of the sea into its basin would have released tremendous amounts of heat and mechanical energy, enough to boil the oceans and metamorphose the minerals in the mountains. No trace of such a catastrophe exists.

Formation of mountains during the Flood does not explain why different mountains are different ages. The Appalachians are much older than the Rockies, for example, as one can immediately see just from how the two ranges are differently eroded.

There is abundant evidence in geology for an old earth with mountains that are millions of years old. Also, plate tectonics has been so thoroughly established as fact that it is beyond refute. Your suggestions are laughable in that they contain not a clue about true geology.

[Whaleboy]

I had typed out a nice rebuttal, but what's the point? Quite literally it is self-evident that trev is wrong, and frankly I think when you're deluded to this extent you really should seek psychiatric attention and a couple of elementary science courses. It's more than a little worrying that people of this extreme still exist... now your basic creationism I can put down to ignorance or misguided faith but this is taking the piss!

[trev]

Nothing suggests there was no rain fall.

The rainbow was given after the flood as a sign that the world would never be flooded again. As rain showers on occasion will produce rainbows, the implied non-existence of the rainbow prior to the flood strongly suggests that there was no rain prior to the flood. As Genesis states that a mist/dew watered the earth at this time, lack of rain is not an issue as far as moisture requirements for vegetation growth etc.

[Last Conformist]

Hm. Given the water requirements of some tropical plants, I might want to see the numbers on that one.

[trev]

Hm. Given the water requirements of some tropical plants, I might want to see the numbers on that one.

My posts postulate that the climate was a high humidity climate, probably never below 95% humidity and presumably daytime temps of about 25 - 30C and night temperature about 1C less, this being a sufficient lowering of temp in a very high humidity climate to allow the formation of mists and dews. In this circumstance, moisture requirements for all plant is relatively low