The Flood is biblical event!

[PetriFB]

Jari Iivanainen's article:

http://koti.phnet.fi/elohim/theflood.html


Certain people who believe in the theory of evolution and do not believe that the Flood had ever taken place have often regarded the Flood as a mere legend.

However, it is good to ask whether the Flood really did take place. If we were to make practical observations of the ground and the fossils found therein, and traditional folklore, they would refer quite often to the Flood. These indicate that a large mass destruction had taken place in the immediate past. The following passages will examine these different sources of information, which refer to the Flood.

The Mass Graves of Animals

- It has been estimated that in the Karroo region of South-Africa there would be about 800 billions of skeletal remains of vertebrates (Robert Broom's article in the Science newspaper of January, in the year 1959). This large grave find indicates that it cannot be a question of any natural event. The animals must have been buried very quickly. Generally, this kind of burial is explained in the best way by mass destruction such as the Flood, which can also accumulate strata on animals instantaneously.

- One special matter is the permafrost in Alaska and Siberia, because it can include millions of tons of animals’ bones. Significantly, several of these animals have been large mammals, which would not get along in cold conditions and they themselves could not be buried in any way, or be put into the ground. The next description, which is from the book "Maailman Luonto”, discusses this matter. It indicates how these large animals were found deep in the underground together with different kinds of vegetation:

... Of particular interest here is the fact that the permafrost in Alaska and in Siberia can include noticeable amounts of bones and meat, and half-rotted vegetation and other remains of the organism world. In some places, these form a notable part of the whole soil. A considerable part of the remains is from large animals such as from hairy rhinoceroses, giant lions, beavers, buffaloes, musk, oxen, mammoths, and hairy elephants, which have become extinct. That is why it is clear that the climate of Alaska was much warmer before it became frozen.

- An indication of the large mass graves are also the remains of rhinoceroses, camels, wild-boars and innumerable other animals in Agate Spring of Nebraska. According to the experts on this area, over 9000 remains of these large sized animals have been buried here.

- From Odessa of Russia, remains of animals were excavated in 1845 and bones belonging to more than 100 bears and of horses, boars, mammoths, rhinoceroses, buffaloes, deer, wolves, hyenas, different insect eaters, rodents, otters, pine-martens and foxes were found. These were upside down with different plant remains and birds, and even with fishes (!). This presentation of fishes among these country animals seems to be a clear reference to the Flood.

- In Palermo, Italy, mounds with a large quantity of hippo’s bones were found. As there are also young hippos' bones among the finds, they did not die in natural circumstances. The presence of these young hippos refers clearly to the Flood.

- Cave finds in Yorkshire in England, in China, in the east coast of USA and in Alaska, where a large number of skeletal remains of herbivores and carnivores were discovered. In Yorkshire, England skeletal remains of elephants, rhinoceros, hippo, horse, wild reindeer, tiger, bear, wolf, horse, fox, rabbit, and many birds were found in a cave. Generally, these animals, which can eat each other, would not in any case stay together.

- One example of large grave finds is from France, where more than 10,000 skeletal remains of horses were found.

- Finds of large cemeteries of dinosaurs have also been made. For example, in Belgium many hundreds, even thousands of bones of small dinosaurs were found 300 metres deep in clay stratum. In Montana of USA, about 10,000 bones of duck lizard were found, and from Canadian Alberta graves in which many hundreds of bones of rhinoceros lizards were also found. In addition to this, smaller grave finds related to dinosaurs have been made in different places around the world. It is likely that these animals have been simultaneously devastated. (For example in the book "The age of dinosaur", by well-known evolution researcher Björn Kurten, it is mentioned that several fossils of dinosaurs have been found in the swimming position, their heads twisted backwards, as in a mortal struggle.)

[PetriFB]

PetriFB

Whether you understand the concept or not the truth is that ,properly applied to once living matter the carbon dating process is one of the most reliable and accurate dating methods. This will not change just because you don't know what your talking about. Your young age opinions are simply scientificly not valid and the Answers in Genesis website is full of such misinformation. If necessary I will fill your space with the truth but something tells me that it would be wasted on you.

Grumpy 8)

Apposing opinions of evolution theory are looked have strengthened in the district of the science makers after the year 1961, when John C. Whitcomb and Henry M. Morris published their book concerning the flood "The Genesis Flood". Still more scientists and researchers have verified, that evolution theory can hold as the religious philosophical in the light of the current information, whereby is not anything to do with the science. Even though is claimed, that evolution theory is as true as atomic theory, any scientific examination has not got to succeed, in which had even partly prove this claim about evolution theory!

[PetriFB]

What more measurements we examine so they are more unreliable. From the shellfish which are living in the sweet water was taken specimens and they gave in carbon measurement the age of the thousands years; Science, Vol. 141/1963 . 30 years old seal carcasses age were 4600 year in carbon measurments; Antartic Journal of the US. Just shot seal age was got 1300 year in carbon measurments. When from the same plot was taken different measurements, measurement difference were over 15000 years; New Zealand Journal of Geology and Geophysics, Vol 21/1978.

American professor the expert of Nile valley professor Brew told, that archeologists define age of archeological discovery often themselves according to their own view point.

Carbon method is very unreliable and we cannot hold it as the fact, but only as estimation!

[steen]

Carbon dating is very unreliable method as has been proved before!

Your claim is false. To simply spew "It ain't so" when evidence is presented doesn't show you as anything but a troll.

But let a more experienced Christian than I speak to this:
http://www.asa3.org/ASA/resources/Wiens.html

[Grumpy]

PetriFB

Once again you are simply wrong in all of your posts. Just because some yahoo writes a fairy tail book does not mean it is science. Carbon dating properly employed is the most accurate dating method in science to 50,000 years. Evolution is a fact, and the Earth is 4.5 billion years old.

These facts are not going to change just because you are ignorant of them. Your young Earth creationism is just a fairy tale for those who cannot accept reality as science has shown us. Your delusions are just that...delusions. They have no scientific validity whatsoever.

Grumpy

[PetriFB]

I understand it, when carbon method unreliable has exposed it it is hard to accept, althougth evidences are indisputable.

It is very hard, when "the truth", in which you have believed crash down.

But it is honest, if we can admit the truth before facts, and fact is that carbon method is unreliable method.

But if somebody wanna hold obstinately unreliable methods as fact the shame is in his side.

[McCulloch]

Moderator Intervention
The topic of this debate is about the Flood and a specific paper written in an attempt to provide evidence about that Flood.
Please direct any debate about radiometric dating to this Does Radiometric Dating Yield Inaccurate Results? thread.

As I see it, this is how we got to radiometric dating:
PetriFB stated that the Flood really occurred.
He was challenged for evidence.
PetriFB stated without evidence that the earth is about 6000 years old.
He was challenged for evidence.
PetriFB asserted that radiometric dating is a flawed method.

The logic is really getting far from the theme in the opening post. Even if radiometric dating is flawed, that does not mean that the earth is only 6000 years old. Scientists have many reasons to believe that the 6000 year mark is orders of magnitute in error. But even the 6000 year claim is a bit of a red herring. Even if the earth is only 6000 or so years old, that does not prove a universal flood.

Please, for participation in this thread, read the Finnish theologian's paper and comment on its veracity.[/b]

[jcrawford]

[But I'll take your word for it that there are other creation scientists who support this view.

Michael Oard's extensive research into the causes of an Ice Age are often referred to by other creationists.

http://www.answersingenesis.org/events/ ... aker_ID=24

Here is another link with on-line references to other articles by Mike Oard.

http://www.nwcreation.net/caps/events/oard.html

One has to wonder why God, included the flood in his revealed book but not the ice age.

Wonderment may be said to be at the root of one's search for wisdom.

[Jose]

Please, for participation in this thread, read the Finnish theologian's paper and comment on its veracity.

OK. I read the thing, and found it embarrassing. It seems to be yet another rehash of the old standby arguments.

- To form fossils, plants or animals must be buried rapidly! Fine. We agree. A volcano blows up, ash settles onto things, and stuff gets buried. A cliff collapses, covering things below it. There is ample geological evidence for such things as the causes of burial for various groups of fossils. Yet, we are supposed to believe that this is proof that there was a world-wide flood. Huh?

- Fossils are of extinct organisms, and not of living ones! Fine. We agree. If the Chixulub meteor wiped out the dinosaurs, then, by golly, dinosaurs are no longer with us. We don't see fossils of seals, as he says, but would we expect to whether there was a global flood or not? Somehow, we are supposed to think that since extinct animals are known from fossils, but living animals are alive, there must have been a world-wide flood. Huh?

- Fossils can be found buried in rock, and in mountains! Fine. We agree. He seems to suggest that animals can't easily burrow into mountains and become surrounded by hard rock, so there must have been a world-wide flood. Huh?

- Many oral traditions in different cultures mention floods. Good. There have been lots of floods. If you live in Banda Aceh, you're going to have floods as a part of your oral history. If you live near the Mississippi, you're going to have floods as part of your oral history. If you lived in the valley that was flooded when the Mediterranean broke through the Bosporous (and you escaped), you're going to have floods in your oral history. Yet, we are supposed to think that, because floods happen a lot, and people talk about 'em a lot, this proves that a special one covered the entire world.

The bottom line is pretty much the usual bottom line. While it may be easy to find a piece of information and say "yes, this is consistent with The Flood," this is not proof. There is no effort in any of this to consider, and then eliminate, other explanations for the same pieces of information. "Proof" requires demonstrating that other explanations are ruled out. The Finnish theologian does not do this.

[PetriFB]

Moderator Intervention
The topic of this debate is about the Flood and a specific paper written in an attempt to provide evidence about that Flood.
Please direct any debate about radiometric dating to this Does Radiometric Dating Yield Inaccurate Results? thread.

As I see it, this is how we got to radiometric dating:
PetriFB stated that the Flood really occurred.
He was challenged for evidence.
PetriFB stated without evidence that the earth is about 6000 years old.
He was challenged for evidence.
PetriFB asserted that radiometric dating is a flawed method.

The logic is really getting far from the theme in the opening post. Even if radiometric dating is flawed, that does not mean that the earth is only 6000 years old. Scientists have many reasons to believe that the 6000 year mark is orders of magnitute in error. But even the 6000 year claim is a bit of a red herring. Even if the earth is only 6000 or so years old, that does not prove a universal flood.

Please, for participation in this thread, read the Finnish theologian's paper and comment on its veracity.[/b]

Fragmentation phases of the earth's radioactive material have been held as the most accurate evidences about billion years age of the globe. Resulting as the fragmentation of Helium- gas, however has not been found for the atmosphere. Helium-content of the atmosphere is indeed strong proof for the young age of the globe. The conflict between these two matters has been already over 50 year.

Year 1969 Nobel-candidate, professor Melvin Cook, examined many years amount of helium which was in the atmosphere and its accrual. On the basis of his research, he came to this result, that helium-4, which was in the atmosphere slight amount derives for the young age of the globe. Part for helium-4 of the atmosphere is born for breaking of active isotopes (eg. uranium). Deep in the depth of the earth been born slippery motion helium gets through a stone and a ground stratums and mixes finally to the group of other gases in the atmosphere.

In the earth being amount of radioactive materials fragmentation, which produce helium has been been able to assess accurately. However, there can't found enough amounts for the atmosphere. In the atmosphere being amonut of helium should be million times larger as is current, if globe would be 4.5 billion year old. Melvin Cook indeed asked in Nature-journal already in year 1957 for supporters of evolution: "where is as the result of the radioactive subjects fragmentation being born helium? ( "Where is the Earth´s Radiogenic Helium? " Nature, Vol. 179 No 213/1957 ja "Prehistory and Earth Models ", 1966).

Slight amount of helium has been significant scientific proof for the young age of the globe atmosphere.

[Grumpy]

PetriFB

Once again WRONG. Helium and Hydrogen gas does not stay in the atmosphere of the Earth long. Hydrogen can combine with other chemical giving methane or water,etc. Helium escapes our atmosphere in rather large amounts skewing any possible measurements.

The Earth is 4.5 billion years old according to over 40 different measures of radio active dating.

There is no evidence in all that time of a world wide flood and there is not enough water present on or in the Earth to accomplish that feat. Many pre Biblical accounts of floods are seen as legends, the Biblical account was derived from the amalgamation of these legends, legends which could have their genesis in the flooding of the Mediteranean or the Black Sea in the pre historic ages. This story, like Adam and Eve are not scientifically viable if read as literal.

Grumpy 8)