The biggest evidence of the Flood? The world ocean.

[Right Divider]

I pains me to agree with divider here. It is not logical. All or none thinking helps no one. But, it is not technically a non sequitur.

It is absolutely a non-sequitur.

His claim was:

• The earth is currently ~80% covered with water.
• Therefore, the earth was once 100% covered with water.

That is a classic case of a non-sequitur. The conclusion does NOT follow from the premise.

 

[Derf]

Yes.

As far as we know, though, there weren't any creatures in the water until after there was also dry land.

Did you think some people might have survived 150 days of the water covering the earth during Noah's flood? It doesn't seem like the Bible allows for that.

 

[Idolater]

As far as we know, though, there weren't any creatures in the water until after there was also dry land.

Did you think some people might have survived 150 days of the water covering the earth during Noah's flood? It doesn't seem like the Bible allows for that.

Literally I agree, in our 'broken English' translations of that ancient writ, that detail does appear to be unavoidable, not allowing for any exceptions.

But it's not as if I'm a Scripture denier. If I am, you could only sustain a claim that I'm a 'light' denier, but not a serious or grave denier. I take "six days" literally after all.

I'm just taking the global Flood as a given, and the discovered physical evidence that appears to be consistent with ancient people living in Africa and in the Americas for more than 6000 years, and wondering whether literally just a few, a very small amount, just by chance or luck or providence, survived somehow by accident, until the waters receded.

Into the one world ocean.

I'm asking.

 

[Idolater]

Secular science has done a very poor job explaining how one alleged meteor impact destroyed all the dinosaurs on earth while having no impact on the proliferation of other species. That is because the hypothetical impact at Chixulub could never have wiped out dinosaurs on the other side of the globe, much less all dinosaurs on earth.

Dr. Brown highlighted the fact that while Mars has over 600,000 craters the earth has less than 200. Dr. Brown's book provides keen insights into the geological mysteries of the earth.

Did Mr. Brown (no deliberate disrespect intended just that "Dr. Brown" doesn't really mean anything like how in contrast "Dr. Phil" and "Dr. Oz" are true unique identifiers) actually model "nuclear winter"? Is "nuclear winter" mechanically possible? Enough to cause "extinction events"?

 

[Right Divider]

Literally I agree, in our 'broken English' translations of that ancient writ, that detail does appear to be unavoidable, not allowing for any exceptions.

But it's not as if I'm a Scripture denier. If I am, you could only sustain a claim that I'm a 'light' denier, but not a serious or grave denier. I take "six days" literally after all.

I'm just taking the global Flood as a given, and the discovered physical evidence that appears to be consistent with ancient people living in Africa and in the Americas for more than 6000 years, and wondering whether literally just a few, a very small amount, just by chance or luck or providence, survived somehow by accident, until the waters receded.

Into the one world ocean.

I'm asking.

Again, the Bible is crystal clear that NOBODY but the 8 survived.

Gen 7:19-24 (AKJV/PCE)
(7:19) And the waters prevailed exceedingly upon the earth; and all the high hills, that [were] under the whole heaven, were covered. (7:20) Fifteen cubits upward did the waters prevail; and the mountains were covered. (7:21) 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: (7:22) All in whose nostrils [was] the breath of life, of all that [was] in the dry [land], died. (7:23) 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. (7:24) And the waters prevailed upon the earth an hundred and fifty days.

I really cannot see why you want to deny what is so plain.

 

[Idolater]

Again, the Bible is crystal clear that NOBODY but the 8 survived.

I already granted that.

Gen 7:19-24 (AKJV/PCE)
(7:19) And the waters prevailed exceedingly upon the earth; and all the high hills, that [were] under the whole heaven, were covered. (7:20) Fifteen cubits upward did the waters prevail; and the mountains were covered. (7:21) 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: (7:22) All in whose nostrils [was] the breath of life, of all that [was] in the dry [land], died. (7:23) 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. (7:24) And the waters prevailed upon the earth an hundred and fifty days.

I really cannot see why you want to deny what is so plain.

 

[Right Divider]

Did Mr. Brown (no deliberate disrespect intended just that "Dr. Brown" doesn't really mean anything like how in contrast "Dr. Phil" and "Dr. Oz" are true unique identifiers) actually model "nuclear winter"? Is "nuclear winter" mechanically possible? Enough to cause "extinction events"?

That is quite deliberately disrespectful.

Dr. Brown received a Ph.D. in mechanical engineering from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). That makes him a DR.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/PhD

 

[Derf]

Literally I agree, in our 'broken English' translations of that ancient writ, that detail does appear to be unavoidable, not allowing for any exceptions.

But it's not as if I'm a Scripture denier. If I am, you could only sustain a claim that I'm a 'light' denier, but not a serious or grave denier. I take "six days" literally after all.

I'm just taking the global Flood as a given, and the discovered physical evidence that appears to be consistent with ancient people living in Africa and in the Americas for more than 6000 years, and wondering whether literally just a few, a very small amount, just by chance or luck or providence, survived somehow by accident, until the waters receded.

Into the one world ocean.

I'm asking.

It seems like your belief in 6-day creation should lead you to the conclusion that dating techniques aren't accurate enough to really say that anyone has been in America that long.

 

[Right Divider]

I already granted that.

Then why do you repeatedly deny it?

I'm just taking the global Flood as a given, and the discovered physical evidence that appears to be consistent with ancient people living in Africa and in the Americas for more than 6000 years, and wondering whether literally just a few, a very small amount, just by chance or luck or providence, survived somehow by accident, until the waters receded.

 

[Idolater]

It seems like your belief in 6-day creation should lead you to the conclusion that dating techniques aren't accurate enough to really say that anyone has been in America that long.

That's distinctly possible, I'm more investigating a logical possibility is all. If true, it would actually add more substantiation to the scientific claim that the world was once basically 100% underwater about 6000 years ago. So that's why I'm pursuing it.

 

[Idolater]

Then why do you repeatedly deny it?

If you understood my 'broken English' reference you'd know that I'm not denying that the translations we have all basically agree that nobody besides Noah and his family could have possibly survived, I'm just entertaining the possibility that the 'broken English' isn't as finely definitive and categorical as it appears to be, when we don't recognize it as 'broken English' because the translations themselves of course are always made readable by the translators.

Nobody knows precisely what a native Hebrew speaker around 1500 BC would translate circa 1500 BC Hebrew into, in modern English, no matter how many PhDs they have in ancient languages and culture and anthropology.

That's all I'm saying. And I'm working out logically that which what I'm saying implies.

 

[JudgeRightly]

. . . the world was once basically 100% underwater about 6000 years ago.

The flood began around 3290 ± 100 B.C, around 5300 ± 100 years ago.

This page and the next 3 (just click the "Next Page" button to get to them) explain.

In the Beginning: Compelling Evidence for Creation and the Flood - When Was the Flood, the Exodus, and Creation?

 

[Right Divider]

If you understood my 'broken English' reference you'd know that I'm not denying that the translations we have all basically agree that nobody besides Noah and his family could have possibly survived, I'm just entertaining the possibility that the 'broken English' isn't as finely definitive and categorical as it appears to be, when we don't recognize it as 'broken English' because the translations themselves of course are always made readable by the translators.

That is a silly idea. Do you think that God is unable to communicate in English?

Nobody knows precisely what a native Hebrew speaker around 1500 BC would translate circa 1500 BC Hebrew into, in modern English, no matter how many PhDs they have in ancient languages and culture and anthropology.

So you really do think that God is unable to communicate in "modern English".

That's all I'm saying. And I'm working out logically that which what I'm saying implies.

 

[Idolater]

That is a silly idea. Do you think that God is unable to communicate in English?

He can and does. In our Catechism.

So you really do think that God is unable to communicate in "modern English".

Supra.

you really know how to hurt a guy

 

[Right Divider]

He can and does. In our Catechism.

False.

Supra.

Supra

you really know how to hurt a guy

 

[marke]

Did Mr. Brown (no deliberate disrespect intended just that "Dr. Brown" doesn't really mean anything like how in contrast "Dr. Phil" and "Dr. Oz" are true unique identifiers) actually model "nuclear winter"? Is "nuclear winter" mechanically possible? Enough to cause "extinction events"?

I am not familiar with anything Dr. Brown said about nuclear winter.

 

[Right Divider]

I am not familiar with anything Dr. Brown said about nuclear winter.

The term "nuclear winter" does not appear in In the Beginning: Compelling Evidence for Creation and the Flood

 

[Idolater]

The term "nuclear winter" does not appear in In the Beginning: Compelling Evidence for Creation and the Flood

I use the term "nuclear winter" in quotes because I figured it might not be used in the book, but how about the idea expressed in the term? "Impact winter." That there would be enough suspended particles 'hanging around' in the atmosphere for years to cause an 'extinction event'? Since he is a PhD mechanical engineer this would be something within his professional grasp is why I asked.

 

[Derf]

That's distinctly possible, I'm more investigating a logical possibility is all. If true, it would actually add more substantiation to the scientific claim that the world was once basically 100% underwater about 6000 years ago. So that's why I'm pursuing it.

Sorry for not getting your drift, but if what is true?

 

[Right Divider]

I use the term "nuclear winter" in quotes because I figured it might not be used in the book, but how about the idea expressed in the term? "Impact winter." That there would be enough suspended particles 'hanging around' in the atmosphere for years to cause an 'extinction event'? Since he is a PhD mechanical engineer this would be something within his professional grasp is why I asked.

The flood caused immense death by water and many other things. The events surrounding the flood also caused an ice age. The only one. The ice age is described in his book.