A Deluge of Evidence for the Flood?

[LittlePig]

And I can't think of any reason you would make the comment you made if you weren't suggesting that the find favored your view of a worldwide flood.

Umm, because simply it's a better explanation? And the fact that it's more consistent with the Flood Model doesn't hurt either.

Except, of course, it isn't consistent with a 'Flood Model', since it isn't mixed in with any animals that we know are modern.

Before the rabbits multiply beyond control, I'll just leave my proposal as a rapid burial. Nothing more than that. For this thread, it can just be a giant mud slide.

Since it's still spring time, let's let the rabbits multiply.

Questions for Debate:

1) Does a Global Flood Model provide the best explanation for our current fossil record, geologic formations, and biodiversity?

2) What real science is used in Global Flood Models?

3) What predictions does a Global Flood Model make?

4) Have Global Flood Models ever been subjected to a formal peer review process?

[McCulloch]

Are there any reputable geologists or meteorologists who claim that any of the ice ages were global?

No because none knows. It just depends on each individual imagination.

Do you really believe that scientists just imagine stuff and that's how our science books are written?

[otseng]

I think I must've missed where anybody has answered to my last request for my predictions. Any consensus on this?

I saw the predictions, but maybe don't understand them. Please forgive if I misunderstand the point, but faults and whatnot can be found in single, to multiple strata.

If evolutionary timelines are correct, I'm making the prediction that faults can be found roughly uniform in stratas. This would mean a fault line would start from the very bottom and go up to a certain strata. Above that strata, the fault line would not be extended, since additional stratas would've been deposited after the fault occurred. If faults occured in the past, these fault lines should stop at lower stratas with a fairly uniform distribution.

[Goat]

I think I must've missed where anybody has answered to my last request for my predictions. Any consensus on this?

I saw the predictions, but maybe don't understand them. Please forgive if I misunderstand the point, but faults and whatnot can be found in single, to multiple strata.

If evolutionary timelines are correct, I'm making the prediction that faults can be found roughly uniform in stratas. This would mean a fault line would start from the very bottom and go up to a certain strata. Above that strata, the fault line would not be extended, since additional stratas would've been deposited after the fault occurred. If faults occured in the past, these fault lines should stop at lower stratas with a fairly uniform distribution.

Why are you making that prediction? What other factors are involved besides time? It sounds like you are making too many assumptions, and are trying to retrofit what you do know into predictions.

[Scotracer]

I really have to wonder what some people think science is. They throw around conspirocy theories and such - don't they realise that science is the search to better our understanding of the world we live in, and as such improve our standard of living?

Go back 400 years before the scientific revolution started and look how people lived and moved. It was basically kill or be killed and each person had to work to the bone to feed themselves. Now we have a TINY percentage of the population creating food for the entire populous. We have world-wide travel and communication, access to more information than you'd know what to do with, medication that allows you to live a long life (and not die of stupid stuff like tuberculosis that killed millions).

So to say it's all imagination...if it was how on earth would we have what we do? Some guy just made up the idea of aerodynamics in his head and by chance planes fly? Yeah...sure.

Some people just aren't grateful to what science and scientists have given their lives for.

Just for clarity, this is aimed at Carico, not otseng.

[otseng]

Why are you making that prediction? What other factors are involved besides time? It sounds like you are making too many assumptions, and are trying to retrofit what you do know into predictions.

Well, I'm making a prediction cause the OP asks for it. And I'm making a prediction of standard geology because it would be a differentiation between the FM and standard geology. If they both predict the same thing, then it's no value to explore. But if they predict different things, then exploring the predictions would be valuable.

As for retrofitting, as I've mentioned already, I'm only looking at the model themselves. So, there is no retrofitting. If you have a different prediction based on the standard geology model, feel free to propose it.

As for assumptions, here's what I'm assuming for standard geology:
- A single strata is formed over a long time period (thousand, millions of years)
- Strata boundaries could represent a long time period (thousand, millions of years)
- Each successive strata are formed on top of older stratas.
- Faults, folds, erosion occurred in the past

[Goat]

Why are you making that prediction? What other factors are involved besides time? It sounds like you are making too many assumptions, and are trying to retrofit what you do know into predictions.

Well, I'm making a prediction cause the OP asks for it. And I'm making a prediction of standard geology because it would be a differentiation between the FM and standard geology. If they both predict the same thing, then it's no value to explore. But if they predict different things, then exploring the predictions would be valuable.

As for retrofitting, as I've mentioned already, I'm only looking at the model themselves. So, there is no retrofitting. If you have a different prediction based on the standard geology model, feel free to propose it.

As for assumptions, here's what I'm assuming for standard geology:
- A single strata is formed over a long time period (thousand, millions of years)
- Strata boundaries could represent a long time period (thousand, millions of years)
- Each successive strata are formed on top of older stratas.
- Faults, folds, erosion occurred in the past

Trying to retrofit what we already have all the information on into a claim is not a prediction.

Plus, you are also making an assumption that 'Strata get formed at the same rate', which is not correct.

[Scotracer]

Indeed, individual strata do not form at the same rate. This should be obvious due to the fact they are made up of different materials (i.e. sandstone forms much faster than chalk).

[Carico]

It doesn't matter. We could provide hundreds accounts of ancient people of a global flood, (which exists), evidence of sedimentary layers all over the world, evidence of sea animals on the tops of mountains peaks, and the secular world still wouldn't believe in a global Flood. In fact, there is no more evidence to provide for a Flood. It's all there.

So since the secular world will never believe in the Flood even though every bit of evidence exists for it, then they're simply out to deny God, even if they have to make up events that no one has ever witnessed, such as a myriad of ice ages.

So since the secular world invents events, such as ices ages and fictitious beasts turning into humans, then their stories are more impossible than anything in the bible! That just proves that they have no rational reason to deny God except for Satan. Absolutely none.

So proof of God already exists everywhere around them; in history, in the design of the universe and every living thing, in the historical accounts of Jesus, it's all there. So the secular world doesn't want proof because they'll close their eyes and deny every bit of proof we give them. They simply want to live in their imaginations and make up their own stories. That's called deliberate denial. It proves Jesus right when he said that the world will reject him for no reason. In fact, Jesus is always proven right, unlike scientists and the secular world still rejects him. Again, irrational.

[Scotracer]

It doesn't matter. We could provide hundreds accounts of ancient people of a global flood, (which exists), evidence of sedimentary layers all over the world, evidence of sea animals on the tops of mountains peaks, and the secular world still wouldn't believe in a global Flood. In fact, there is no more evidence to provide for a Flood. It's all there.

So since the secular world will never believe in the Flood even though every bit of evidence exists for it, then they're simply out to deny God, even if they have to make up events that no one has ever witnessed, such as a myriad of ice ages.

So since the secular world invents events, such as ices ages and fictitious beasts turning into humans, then their stories are more impossible than anything in the bible! That just proves that they have no rational reason to deny God except for Satan. Absolutely none.

So proof of Go already exists everywhere around them; in history, in the design of the universe and every living thing, in the historical accounts of Jesus, it's all there. SO the secular world doesn't want proof because they'll close their eyes and deny every bit of proof they give them. They simply want to live in their imaginations and make up their own stories. That's called deliberate denial.

Pro-tip: We're still in an ice-age, sonny

Ice age means a period of time where there are ice sheets covering parts of at least one continent. So yeah, we have plenty of people have "witnessed an ice age".

Nice try though.

[Carico]

It doesn't matter. We could provide hundreds accounts of ancient people of a global flood, (which exists), evidence of sedimentary layers all over the world, evidence of sea animals on the tops of mountains peaks, and the secular world still wouldn't believe in a global Flood. In fact, there is no more evidence to provide for a Flood. It's all there.

So since the secular world will never believe in the Flood even though every bit of evidence exists for it, then they're simply out to deny God, even if they have to make up events that no one has ever witnessed, such as a myriad of ice ages.

So since the secular world invents events, such as ices ages and fictitious beasts turning into humans, then their stories are more impossible than anything in the bible! That just proves that they have no rational reason to deny God except for Satan. Absolutely none.

So proof of Go already exists everywhere around them; in history, in the design of the universe and every living thing, in the historical accounts of Jesus, it's all there. SO the secular world doesn't want proof because they'll close their eyes and deny every bit of proof they give them. They simply want to live in their imaginations and make up their own stories. That's called deliberate denial.

Pro-tip: We're still in an ice-age, sonny

Ice age means a period of time where there are ice sheets covering parts of at least one continent. So yeah, we have plenty of people have "witnessed an ice age".

Nice try though.

So what you're saying is that ice never covered the whole earth. Is that correct? if so, then how do you explain the sedimentary rock layers all over the world, in every coast and every continent? So are you and scientists going to rack your brains to come up with another new story that no one in history can document to explain that instead of the obvious explanation of a global Flood? I'd love to hear your new stories. I'm sure they're as entertaining as fictitious beasts turning into humans. Scientists have no reason to claim that the events in the bible are impossible.