Jump to content


Photo

Noah's Ark - Thinking Outside The Box


  • Please log in to reply
88 replies to this topic

#1 Adam Nagy

Adam Nagy

    Honorable Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7048 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 37
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Posted 11 March 2009 - 08:14 PM

This video is awesome. The graphics are pretty cool so go full screen when you watch it if you can. I feel so blessed to be in a time when so many dedicated people are exploring and thinking critically about the ideas we have about the distant past presented accurately by the Bible:

IXZCEJwiC3A

X237IpEppm0

YlHWBkjvJ2Q

#2 Adam Nagy

Adam Nagy

    Honorable Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7048 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 37
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Posted 11 March 2009 - 08:35 PM

Noah's flood is a thought provoking and humbling reminder of who's in charge around here and who owns this Universe. I still to this day find Walt Brown's Hydroplate theory as the most compelling perspective on what took place during the flood:

24FhuOs38YU

I know it's not that important but I hoped I could find a little better visual of what it may have looked like. AiG delivered and gives us something to think about:

FlPdk4j5R1Y

With this profound event and the ample scaring remaining on the earth I guess I can understand why Satan was in a big hurry to promote a Chronological Snobbery that would have the world scoffing at the Global Flood before geological features and archeology could be viewed in a whole.

#3 Guest_loveslife_*

Guest_loveslife_*
  • Guests

Posted 05 April 2009 - 02:34 PM

Have you ever wondered why the cultures in Mesopotamia (Sumerian), Indus Valley, Egypt, the Minoan, and China were writing histories before, during, and after the flood without mentioning something like "Oh btw, there was a flood that killed everybody"? Its funny how these civilizations were wiped out, yet still their corpses evidently continued writing their unbroken histories and never felt like mentioning the entire earth was flooded.

So apparently Noah was a giant that lived for 950 years, island based animals flew to the middle east to board the ship, animals that can only live in extreme cold were given cold suits to survive the heat, the ship flew because it couldn't float (and no, 450ft long ships made entirely of wood don't float), it had a forest growing on it, the animals no longer felt the need to eat, breathe, or drink for nearly a year, the predators got along just fine with their prey, the 4.5 trillion cubic kilometers of water magically appeared then magically vanished, the oceans were desalinated by these rains but the saltwater species were given magic powers to withstand it, getting rid of the animals' refuse would have been a problem but they don't eat anymore so no worries there, the dinosaurs (which outnumber today's modern species 100 to 1) got a little restless but Noah kept them in line.
Does that make sense?

If you take the story of Noah metaphorically, you may see things like...

The ark represents baptism and how it can save you.
The ark represents church and how it can save you.
The story is a warning about final judgement.
The story makes a statement about the second coming and how those who do not believe will drown.
...etc.

If you take the story of Noah literally, you miss possible hidden messages and meanings and instead must swallow absurdities...

How did the creatures get there? How long does it take a snail to cross Australia, swim across an ocean, and arrive in the middle east?
How did it float?
How did the animals fit?
How did they get on in 7 days?
How did they eat? Did Noah bring 300kg of leafy vegetables/day for each elephant (over 200,000 kg for the pair for the year, ignoring the fact that it would rot btw).
With all the plants submerged, there would not be enough oxygen to breathe.
The layers from a global scale flood would be perhaps a mile or more thick. Why is there no geologic evidence?
How did cultures continue writing histories before, during, and after this supposed flood and make no mention of it. How did the animals get back to their respective continents?
How did the animals keep from eatting each other?
How did the earth get repopulated by 8 people in so short a time?

So since I've provided plenty of reasons why the bible should be taken metaphorically, could you provide some reasons why it should instead be taken literally?

#4 Bex

Bex

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1066 posts
  • Interests:God, creation, friends/family, animals, health topics, auto/biographies, movies (horror, comedy, drama, whatever, just as long as it's good), music, video games (mainly survival horror, or survival/adventure types), crossword puzzles, books on real life crime/serial killers/etc. Prophecy/miracles/supernatural/hauntings etc, net surfing/forums etc.<br /><br />One of my favourite forums for information on many topics:<br /><br />http://orbisvitae.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php?ubb=cfrm
  • Age: 38
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • New Zealand

Posted 05 April 2009 - 03:31 PM

Have you ever wondered why the cultures in Mesopotamia (Sumerian), Indus Valley, Egypt, the Minoan, and China were writing histories before, during, and after the flood without mentioning something like "Oh btw, there was a flood that killed everybody"? Its funny how these civilizations were wiped out, yet still their corpses evidently continued writing their unbroken histories and never felt like mentioning the entire earth was flooded.


There are over 250(probably nearer to 300) flood legends from different cultures worldwide. In fact, just in my south pacific part of the world, one of them is about "Nu'u" and his family of eight escaping the flood on a giant outrigger with a large house on top containing paired representatives of the main air breathing, earth dwelling animals kinds. And how his giant outrigger was stranded on a mountain in Hawaiaki ( today's Hawaii?). Any amateur linguist needs no telling of the clear connection between the polynesian "Nu'u" and "Noah". All of them, have more-a-less correspondence to the Genesis account and when an Aborigine elder heard the Genesis account, his face lit up in recognition and he graciously and spontaneously said "Your story is better than ours"!!

The bible already predicted there would be those who would deny/scoff at creation and a worldwide flood:

2 Peter 3-8
False teachers
First of all, do not forget the in the final days there will come sarcastic scoffers whose life is ruled by their passions.  'What has happened to the promise of his coming'?  they will say, 'Since our Fathers died everything has gone on just as it has since the beginning of creation!'  They deliberately ignore the fact that long ago there were the heavens and the earth, formed out of water and through water by the Word of God, and that it was through these same factors that the world of those days was destroyed by the floodwaters.  It is the same Word which is reserving the present heavens and earth for fire, keeping them till the Day of Judgement and of the destruction of sinners .


Have you read the information already on this forum regarding the questions you have asked? I'd do a good search. I'd say they have already been discussed/addressed.

At any rate, you might find this interesting:


Below taken from http://www.answersin...world-graveyard

THE WORLD IS A GRAVEYARD. FOSSIL EVIDENCES AROUND THE WORLD INDICATING WORLDWIDE FLOOD

Six main geologic evidences for the Genesis Flood

Evidence #1. Fossils of sea creatures high above sea level
Evidence #2. Rapid burial of plants and animals
Evidence #3. Rapidly deposited sediment layers spread across vast areas
Evidence #4. Sediment transported long distances
Evidence #5. Rapid or no erosion between strata
Evidence #6. Many strata laid down in rapid succession

Countless billions of plant and animal fossils are found in extensive “graveyards” where they had to be buried rapidly on a massive scale. Often the fine details of the creatures are exquisitely preserved.

For example, billions of straight-shelled, chambered nautiloids (figure 2) are found fossilized with other marine creatures in a 7 foot (2 m) thick layer within the Redwall Limestone of Grand Canyon (figure 1).1 This fossil graveyard stretches for 180 miles (290 km) across northern Arizona and into southern Nevada, covering an area of at least 10,500 square miles (30,000 km2). These squid-like fossils are all different sizes, from small, young nautiloids to their bigger, older relatives.

Posted Image

To form such a vast fossil graveyard required 24 cubic miles (100 km3) of lime sand and silt, flowing in a thick, soup-like slurry at more than 16 feet (5 m) per second (more than 11 mph [18 km/h]) to catastrophically overwhelm and bury this huge, living population of nautiloids.

Hundreds of thousands of marine creatures were buried with amphibians, spiders, scorpions, millipedes, insects, and reptiles in a fossil graveyard at Montceau-les-Mines, France.2 More than 100,000 fossil specimens, representing more than 400 species, have been recovered from a shale layer associated with coal beds in the Mazon Creek area near Chicago.3 This spectacular fossil graveyard includes ferns, insects, scorpions, and tetrapods buried with jellyfish, mollusks, crustaceans, and fish, often with soft parts exquisitely preserved.

At Florissant, Colorado, a wide variety of insects, freshwater mollusks, fish, birds, and several hundred plant species (including nuts and blossoms) are buried together.4 Bees and birds have to be buried rapidly in order to be so well preserved.

Alligator, fish (including sunfish, deep sea bass, chubs, pickerel, herring, and garpike 3–7 feet [1–2 m] long), birds, turtles, mammals, mollusks, crustaceans, many varieties of insects, and palm leaves (7–9 feet [2–2.5 m] long) were buried together in the vast Green River Formation of Wyoming.5

Notice in many of these examples how marine and land-dwelling creatures are found buried together. How could this have happened unless the ocean waters rose and swept over the continents in a global, catastrophic Flood?

At Fossil Bluff on the north coast of Australia’s island state of Tasmania (figure 3), many thousands of marine creatures (corals, bryozoans [lace corals], bivalves [clams], and gastropods [snails]) were buried together in a broken state, along with a toothed whale (figure 4) and a marsupial possum (figure 5).6 Whales and possums don’t live together, so only a watery catastrophe would have buried them together! In order for such large ammonites (figure 8) and other marine creatures to be buried in the chalk beds of Britain (figure 6), many trillions of microscopic marine creatures (figure 7) had to bury them catastrophically.7 These same beds also stretch right across Europe to the Middle East, as well as into the Midwest of the USA, forming a global-scale fossil graveyard. In addition, more than 7 trillion tons of vegetation are buried in the world’s coal beds found across every continent, including Antarctica.

Exquisite Preservation
Such was the speed at which many creatures were buried and fossilized—under catastrophic flood conditions—that they were exquisitely preserved. Many fish were buried so rapidly, virtually alive, that even fine details of fins and eye sockets have been preserved (figure 9). Many trilobites (figure 10) have been so exquisitely preserved that even the compound lens systems in their eyes are still available for detailed study.

Posted Image
Posted Image

Mawsonites spriggi, when discovered, was identified as a fossilized jellyfish (figure 11). It was found in a sandstone bed that covers more than 400 square miles (1,040 km2) of outback South Australia.8 Millions of such soft-bodied marine creatures are exquisitely preserved in this sandstone bed.
Soft-bodied marine creatures, such as this fossilized jellyfish (Mawsonites spriggi), are finely preserved in a sandstone bed.
Posted Image

Consider what happens to soft-bodied creatures like jellyfish when washed up on a beach today. Because they consist only of soft “jelly,” they melt in the sun and are also destroyed by waves crashing onto the beach. Based on this reality, the discoverer of these exquisitely preserved soft-bodied marine creatures concluded that all of them had to be buried in less than a day!

Some fish were buried alive and fossilized so quickly in the geologic record that they were “caught in the act” of eating their last meal (figure 12). Then there is the classic example of a female marine reptile, an ichthyosaur, about 6 feet (2 m) long, found fossilized at the moment of giving birth to her baby (figure 13)! One minute this huge creature was giving birth, then seconds later, without time to escape, mother and baby were buried and “snap frozen” in a catastrophic “avalanche” of lime mud.
Many fish were buried alive and fossilized quickly, such as this fish “caught in the act” of eating its last meal.
Posted Image

#5 Bex

Bex

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1066 posts
  • Interests:God, creation, friends/family, animals, health topics, auto/biographies, movies (horror, comedy, drama, whatever, just as long as it's good), music, video games (mainly survival horror, or survival/adventure types), crossword puzzles, books on real life crime/serial killers/etc. Prophecy/miracles/supernatural/hauntings etc, net surfing/forums etc.<br /><br />One of my favourite forums for information on many topics:<br /><br />http://orbisvitae.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php?ubb=cfrm
  • Age: 38
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • New Zealand

Posted 05 April 2009 - 03:57 PM

Continued on from above....

This female ichthyosaur, a marine reptile, was found fossilized at the moment of giving birth to her baby.
Posted Image

Conclusions
These are but a few examples of the many hundreds of fossil graveyards found all over the globe that are now well-documented in the geological literature.9 The countless billions and billions of fossils in these graveyards, in many cases exquisitely preserved, testify to the rapid burial of once-living plants and animals on a global scale in a watery cataclysm and its immediate aftermath. Often these fossil graveyards consist of mixtures of marine and land-dwelling creatures, indicating that the waters of this global cataclysm swept over both the oceans and the continents.

When we again read the biblical account of the Flood and ask ourselves what evidence we should expect, the answer is obvious—billions of dead plants and animals buried in rock layers laid down by water all over the world. And that’s exactly what we find. The global, cataclysmic Genesis Flood and its aftermath was an actual event in history, just as God tells us in His record of earth’s history.

HERE IS ONE FISH IN THE ACT OF SWALLOWING ANOTHER FISH. EVEN A DUMB PERSON CAN FIGURE OUT THAT THIS FISH WAS COVERED RAPIDLY IN A WORLD WIDE FLOOD. ANY FISH CAN JUST SWIM AWAY IN A LOCAL FLOOD. IF THE FLOOD OF NOAH WAS JUST LOCAL THEN WHY DID HE NOT JUST MOVE AWAY. WHY WOULD HE OF HAD TO BUILD SUCH A HUGE BOAT AND PUT TWO OF EVERY KIND OF LAND DWELLING CREATURE IN THE ARK.
Posted Image

If you really believe that the Colorado river carved out the Grand Canyon over the millions of years then you have more faith then I have. To believe that is like saying a rain drop carved out the Columbia Gorge.
Posted Image
Posted Image
PETRIFIED LOGS LIKE THIS ONE ARE FOUND ALL OVER THE WORLD TESTIFYING TO THE FACT THAT THERE WAS AN ACTUAL WORLD WIDE FLOOD. MANY EVOLUTIONISTS ARE SO BLINDED THAT THEY WILL BELIEVE THAT MARS WAS COVERED BY A WORLD WIDE FLOOD BUT WILL NOT BELIEVE THAT THE EARTH WAS ONCE COVERED BY A FLOOD. THE EARTH HAS ALOT MORE WATER THEN MARS. (THE EARTHS LAND MASS IS COVERD BY 2/3 WATER) IN FACT SOME EVOLUTIOISTS ONLY SPECULATE THAT THERE IS SOME ICE ON MARS.
Posted Image

#6 Guest_loveslife_*

Guest_loveslife_*
  • Guests

Posted 05 April 2009 - 04:18 PM

There are over 250(probably nearer to 300) flood legends from different cultures worldwide.  In fact, just in my south pacific part of the world, one of them is about "Nu'u" and his family of eight escaping the flood on a giant outrigger with a large house on top containing paired representatives of the main air breathing, earth dwelling animals kinds. And how his giant outrigger was stranded on a mountain in Hawaiaki ( today's Hawaii?). Any amateur linguist needs no telling of the clear connection between the polynesian "Nu'u" and "Noah". All of them, have more-a-less correspondence to the Genesis account and when an Aborigine elder heard the Genesis account, his face lit up in recognition and he graciously and spontaneously said "Your story is better than ours"!!

View Post

That's great - lots of cultures discussed floods - this is normal considering the tendency for people to live near water. But it does not address what I was saying.

People that lived before, during, and after the flood have unbroken written histories that detail their lives before, during, and after the time this flood supposedly occurred. Think about that. It's kind of hard writing when you're a mile underwater.

#7 CTD

CTD

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2059 posts
  • Age: 44
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Missouri

Posted 05 April 2009 - 04:37 PM

That's great - lots of cultures discussed floods - this is normal considering the tendency for people to live near water. But it does not address what I was saying.

People that lived before, during, and after the flood have unbroken written histories that detail their lives before, during, and after the time this flood supposedly occurred. Think about that. It's kind of hard writing when you're a mile underwater.

View Post

Have you any evidence to present?

Anything that is presented without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

View Post



#8 Guest_loveslife_*

Guest_loveslife_*
  • Guests

Posted 05 April 2009 - 06:37 PM

Have you any evidence to present?

View Post

I'm really glad you asked me that, because I was mistaken on a couple of the civilizations I mentioned. The Minoan and Chinese written histories don't go back as far as I thought. I apologize for those mistakes. |According to wiki, "According to legend, Chinese characters were invented by Cangjie (c. 2650 BC), a bureaucrat under the legendary emperor, Huangdi" but I can't find evidence of histories that old. But anyway, as for the rest,

Literalists and Fundamentalists rely on the internal biblical chronology to count backwards from the relatively secure dates in the historical books (largely the books of Kings, where events such as the destruction of Jerusalem by the Babylonians can be verified from non-biblical sources) to the genealogies contained in Genesis 5 and 11. Archbishop Ussher, using this method in the 17th century, arrived at 2349 BC. ~ wiki

The Sumerians, with a language, culture, and, perhaps, appearance different from their Semitic neighbors and successors were at one time believed to have been invaders, but the archaeological record shows cultural continuity from the time of the early Ubaid period (5200-4500 BC C-14, 6090-5429 calBC) settlements in southern Mesopotamia.
http://www.crystalin...merhistory.html

The seals of the Indus valley: from 2500 BC
As in the other great early civilizations, the bureaucrats of the Indus valley have the benefit of writing to help them in their administration. The Indus script, which has not yet been deciphered, is known from thousands of seals, carved in steatite or soapstone.
http://www.historywo...?historyid=ab73

The earliest evidence for writing the Egyptian language in hieroglyphs dates to about 3300 B.C.E. During the 1990s, the archaeologist Gunter Dreyer discovered the earliest known inscriptions, a group of seals bearing the names of early Egyptian kings who reigned from 3300 B.C.E. to about 3100 B.C.E. , in the town of Abydos, located in central Egypt. Dreyer’s discoveries newly suggest that Egyptian was the first written language in the eastern Mediterranean, pre-dating Sumerian, the next oldest written language, whose writing system was invented in what is now modern Iraq about 3000 B.C.E. Hieroglyphs and more cursive forms of Egyptian writing called hieratic and demotic continued in use in Egypt for nearly 3,500 years. The Pyramid Texts , the funeral liturgy found in royal pyramids in the late Fifth and early Sixth Dynasties, and the autobiographies found in tombs of the same period (2500–2170 B.C.E. ) constitute the first known Egyptian literature.
http://encyclopedia....d-Language.html

#9 Adam Nagy

Adam Nagy

    Honorable Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7048 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 37
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Posted 05 April 2009 - 07:15 PM

Here are a couple of threads that dispel linear thinking in history where it does not belong:

http://creationwiki....ical_Chronology

http://www.kent.net/...lacedDynasties/


Darwin Under The Microscope from Phil Holden on Vimeo.

Historians have their biases and their misconceptions, as well, that are constantly being revised and revisited. The standard of thought that keeps proving itself true even through the darkness of our chronological snobbery is the 66 books of Holy Scripture. Maybe just maybe it's true.

#10 Adam Nagy

Adam Nagy

    Honorable Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7048 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 37
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Posted 05 April 2009 - 07:22 PM

I'm going to add this video in here because it pertains so nicely to this topic:

bdC1re_NqkI

NPcbeWJtf84

NkxXm1jHO3A

#11 CTD

CTD

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2059 posts
  • Age: 44
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Missouri

Posted 05 April 2009 - 07:34 PM

I'm really glad you asked me that, because I was mistaken on a couple of the civilizations I mentioned. The Minoan and Chinese written histories don't go back as far as I thought. I apologize for those mistakes. According to wiki, "According to legend, Chinese characters were invented by Cangjie (c. 2650 BC), a bureaucrat under the legendary emperor, Huangdi" but I can't find evidence of histories that old. But anyway, as for the rest,

Literalists and Fundamentalists rely on the internal biblical chronology to count backwards from the relatively secure dates in the historical books (largely the books of Kings, where events such as the destruction of Jerusalem by the Babylonians can be verified from non-biblical sources) to the genealogies contained in Genesis 5 and 11. Archbishop Ussher, using this method in the 17th century, arrived at 2349 BC. ~ wiki

The Sumerians, with a language, culture, and, perhaps, appearance different from their Semitic neighbors and successors were at one time believed to have been invaders, but the archaeological record shows cultural continuity from the time of the early Ubaid period (5200-4500 BC C-14, 6090-5429 calBC) settlements in southern Mesopotamia.
http://www.crystalin...merhistory.html

The seals of the Indus valley: from 2500 BC
As in the other great early civilizations, the bureaucrats of the Indus valley have the benefit of writing to help them in their administration. The Indus script, which has not yet been deciphered, is known from thousands of seals, carved in steatite or soapstone.
http://www.historywo...?historyid=ab73

The earliest evidence for writing the Egyptian language in hieroglyphs dates to about 3300 B.C.E. During the 1990s, the archaeologist Gunter Dreyer discovered the earliest known inscriptions, a group of seals bearing the names of early Egyptian kings who reigned from 3300 B.C.E. to about 3100 B.C.E. , in the town of Abydos, located in central Egypt. Dreyer’s discoveries newly suggest that Egyptian was the first written language in the eastern Mediterranean, pre-dating Sumerian, the next oldest written language, whose writing system was invented in what is now modern Iraq about 3000 B.C.E. Hieroglyphs and more cursive forms of Egyptian writing called hieratic and demotic continued in use in Egypt for nearly 3,500 years. The Pyramid Texts , the funeral liturgy found in royal pyramids in the late Fifth and early Sixth Dynasties, and the autobiographies found in tombs of the same period (2500–2170 B.C.E. ) constitute the first known Egyptian literature.
http://encyclopedia....d-Language.html

View Post

Are you aware of the problems regarding Egyptian chronologies? Those who've been here a while may recall this thread:
http://www.evolution...topic=1922&st=0

Your Sumeria link probably contains some clues for someone who wanted to start an investigation. The only reference given is "Reference: Encyclopedia Britannica 1911", and somehow I don't think "calibrated radiocarbon dates" had reached their peak efficiency at that time.

The Indus Valley link makes a lot of statements, but I don't see where they explain how the dates are obtained. Your second paragraph indicates that you consider this to be an issue, at least sometimes.

In reconciling histories, sources which have proven reliable are given more weight than unproven and unreliable sources. Numbers come into play as well. The story I accept of the flood and the preceding creation reconciles with many, many stories from all around the globe, in some cases very well indeed. The opposition has a mere handful, and they have to rely upon evodates to support a good deal of what they claim. Their case is only convincing to those who are prejudiced and wish it true.

In spite of all the time and money spent on the endeavour, the number of stories pieced together which even manage to come into conflict with the chronology of the flood can't even match the number of independent stories claiming the first man was made from earth.

The assertion that stories of a great flood are common because floods are common doesn't withstand scrutiny at all. If floods are common, people should be reporting multiple floods - not one great flood. Just how stupid must one assume the ancient men to have been? Universally, no less! That assertion is as mockworthy as they come; clearly not compatible with seeking truth and acknowledging reality.

Maybe someday we'll see arguments for excessive antiquity of mankind based on evidence like this?
Posted Image

#12 Bex

Bex

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1066 posts
  • Interests:God, creation, friends/family, animals, health topics, auto/biographies, movies (horror, comedy, drama, whatever, just as long as it's good), music, video games (mainly survival horror, or survival/adventure types), crossword puzzles, books on real life crime/serial killers/etc. Prophecy/miracles/supernatural/hauntings etc, net surfing/forums etc.<br /><br />One of my favourite forums for information on many topics:<br /><br />http://orbisvitae.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php?ubb=cfrm
  • Age: 38
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • New Zealand

Posted 05 April 2009 - 11:10 PM

That's great - lots of cultures discussed floods - this is normal considering the tendency for people to live near water. But it does not address what I was saying.

People that lived before, during, and after the flood have unbroken written histories that detail their lives before, during, and after the time this flood supposedly occurred. Think about that. It's kind of hard writing when you're a mile underwater.

View Post


Hmmmm, I'm not sure whether I'd find it quite so easy to dismiss such incredible shared and near identical legends as mere coincidence or caused by living near water. In the face of each culture speaking of worldwide flood, a huge boat and a man and his family and animals being saved with a name suspiciously similar to Noah in 250+ cultures, there isn't too much room for such premature doubts/cynicism. I'd say it's VERY important to all of us to take notice of, considering that legends can often have their basis in actual events/facts.

Yes it would be kind of hard writing when you're a mile under water. You might want consider that the legends of the worldwide flood were post flood, passed down from Noah and his family. I'd say that's a more reasonable/logical explanation ;)


But let's take a look at some more interesting "coincidences"

Ancient Local Place Names verify The Great Flood Account in Genesis: Noah's Ark, Family and Landing place.

GENESIS ACCOUNT
1. The Flood was a divine judgement upon
the whole anediluvian (pre-flood) world.

2. Toward the end of the Flood, Noah sent
out a crow to test for the re-emergence of
land. At first, with nowhere to stand, it kept
returning; finally it did not return.

3. The Ark eventually came to rest in the
mountains.

4. They emerged from the Ark as though from
death, to start a new world.

5. And Noah built an alter and offered a sacrifice
of thanksgiving to God.

6. Historians tell us that pilgrims journeyed to
this site in ages past.

7. The company who survived the Flood were long
considered by the ancient world as the heroes
of man.

8. Eight human survivors emerged from the Ark
into this valley.

(note, above numbered texts correspond directly to the below and note the significance).

LOCAL PLACE NAMES
1. The area of the slopes near the boat shaped
object is called MAHSER, which means "The
last judgement day".

2. A nearby village bears the name KARGACONMAZ
which means "the crow will not stand or return".

3. The nearby castle of DARONYNK stands
on a site whose name means "where the
oars were reversed".

4. The field near the boat shaped object is
called NAHSUR "Raised from the dead".

5. The nearby village once bore the name
NASAR, which means "to make a
presentation or sacrifice".

6. The point above the head of the valley
is called ZIYARET DOG "voluntary
pilgrimage".

7. The closer end of the ridge is named
YIGITYATAGI "hero's bed" i.e. "the
habitat of heroes" or "Where the heroes
come from."

8. The Valley which stretches down from
here was anciently known as "The
region of Eight". Lower in this valley
near some ancient grave markers
bearing iconographs of eight persons,
stands KAZAN or ARZEP, a village
"The Place of Eight".


Thirteen Stone sea Anchors (Drogue Stones) have been discovered in the area of the boat shaped object. Thirteen out of an estimated eighteen have been found. They are by FAR the largest in the world averaging 8,7000lbs in weight (4 tons), measuring 10 feet in height, 5 feet wide and 18" - 24" thick. Some lie at intervals, cut loose when dragging along the shallow route taken by the vessel through receding flood waters to its Al Judi landing place. Each anchor stone had a cable hole at the top so that it could be suspended underneath to stabilise the colossal vessel in turbulent waters. Petrified animals dropping have also been found at the Ark site. Petrified antler also found. Iron rivet timber fixing have also been found. From Genesis, we know that metal production was a science long before teh time of the Flood. "And Zillah, she also bare Tubalcain, and instructor of every artificer in brass and iron: and the sister of Tubalcain was Naamah". (Gen 4:22).

A thumb bone has also been found near what is believed to have been Noah's "grave". The thumb bone came from a human being at least twice the normal height of today.

Hurite Column:
Remains of the 2000 BC Hurite Column on which were found inscriptions of a boat-shaped object with eight faces from within the boat, a volcanic peak and two birds above.

Fossilised deck timber recovered from the site proved to be laminated wood!
Testing was carried out by Galbraith Labs in Knoxville, Tennessee, and the results showed the sample to contain over 70% organic carbon, consistent with fossilized wood. The specimen was once living matter. Later thin sections were cut from the sample for microscopic examination. The wood consisted of three layers. It was laminated wood! The cementing substance used was resin made from tree sap. Never before has petrified wood been found that was laminated. This revealed that the construction methods used by Noah in building the ark included three-ply laminating!

Two lichen covered stone grave markers were also discovered nearby. Incised into the surface were simple sketches of stunning revelations. Three parallel semicircles depicted a rainbow. A simple boat atop a simple wave depicted the Ark and the Great Flood. Eight stick figures depicted Noah's three sons, their sives and Noah himself with open eyes and raised heads walking away from a mother figure with her eyes shut, head bowed and still, as if dead. The other tombstone depicted Noah's three sons and their sives similarly walking away from two dead parents figures. Luckily (thankfully) these are on video, as the tombstones are now missing (plundered/robbed).

The graves were also plundered and deprived Turkey and all humanity of our sacred heritage from the post-flood parents of us all. Noah's wife's grave was 18 feet long. In it were priceless artifacts of gold and precious stones and possibly her skeletal remains. She is estimated to have been approximately 12 feet tall. The Turkish government is determined to recover the precious plunder. It already has the polished granite grave slab cover measuring 18 feet. A chance recovery nearby of a human thumb bone indicates a 12 foot owner.

Noah's Cottage?
Near the tombstones lie the ruins of a half-buried cottage thought to be Noah's house. The walls are 3 foot thick. on one wall, in simple stone incisions, were accounts of the Great flood, fortunately recorded on video tape, but unfortunately removed by local Kurds.

Noah's Alter?
A short distance from the cottage lies a small hill. Near it's base is a huge natural alter stone. Normally the priest or person offering sacrifice stands before a waist high alter. This alter is, however, six feet high. That this was an alter is verified by the nearby "U" shaped bleeding stones, where the animal sacrifices took place, before being laid upon the alter (according to sacrifical ritual).

I have not gone into everything here, but given some examples of discoveries in those areas. One can find out MUCH more than what I've given here!

Source material:

*'Discovery Volumes' by Wyatt Archaeological Research. 713 Lambert Drive Nashville, TN 37220

*'The Ark Conspiracy' By Jonathan Gray. Published by Australian Seminar Services PO Box 3370 Grenfell Street. Adelaide, South Australia 5000.

*'Discoveries: Questions Answered' By Jonathan Gray.


#13 Bex

Bex

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1066 posts
  • Interests:God, creation, friends/family, animals, health topics, auto/biographies, movies (horror, comedy, drama, whatever, just as long as it's good), music, video games (mainly survival horror, or survival/adventure types), crossword puzzles, books on real life crime/serial killers/etc. Prophecy/miracles/supernatural/hauntings etc, net surfing/forums etc.<br /><br />One of my favourite forums for information on many topics:<br /><br />http://orbisvitae.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php?ubb=cfrm
  • Age: 38
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • New Zealand

Posted 06 April 2009 - 12:06 AM

All over the world there have been marine fossils found on mountain tops. One must ask....how did they get there?

Marine Fossils High above Sea Level

It is beyond dispute among geologists that on every continent we find fossils of sea creatures in rock layers which today are high above sea level. For example, we find marine fossils in most of the rock layers in Grand Canyon. This includes the topmost layer in the sequence, the Kaibab Limestone exposed at the rim of the canyon, which today is approximately 7,000–8,000 feet (2,130–2,440 m) above sea level.1 Though at the top of the sequence, this limestone must have been deposited beneath ocean waters loaded with lime sediment that swept over northern Arizona (and beyond).

Other rock layers exposed in Grand Canyon also contain large numbers of marine fossils. The best example is the Redwall Limestone, which commonly contains fossil brachiopods (a clam-like organism), corals, bryozoans (lace corals), crinoids (sea lilies), bivalves (types of clams), gastropods (marine snails), trilobites, cephalopods, and even fish teeth.

These marine fossils are found haphazardly preserved in this limestone bed. The crinoids, for example, are found with their columnals (disks) totally separated from one another, while in life they are stacked on top of one another to make up their “stems.” Thus, these marine creatures were catastrophically destroyed and buried in this lime sediment.

Posted Image


The Explanation

There is only one possible explanation for this phenomenon—the ocean waters at some time in the past flooded over the continents.

Could the continents have then sunk below today’s sea level, so that the ocean waters flooded over them?

No! The continents are made up of lighter rocks that are less dense than the rocks on the ocean floor and rocks in the mantle beneath the continents. The continents, in fact, have an automatic tendency to rise, and thus “float” on the mantle rocks beneath, well above the ocean floor rocks.4 This explains why the continents today have such high elevations compared to the deep ocean floor, and why the ocean basins can hold so much water.

There had to be two mechanisms for the sea level to rise. First, water was added to the ocean. Second, the ocean floor itself rose.So there must be another way to explain how the oceans covered the continents. The sea level had to rise, so that the ocean waters then flooded up onto—and over—the continents. What would have caused that to happen?

There had to be, in fact, two mechanisms.

First, if water were added to the ocean, then the sea level would rise.

Scientists are currently monitoring the melting of the polar ice caps because the extra water would cause the sea level to rise and flood coastal communities.

The Bible suggests a source of the extra water. In Genesis 7:11 we read that at the initiation of the Flood all the fountains of the great deep were broken up. In other words, the earth’s crust was split open all around the globe and water apparently burst forth as fountains from inside the earth. We then read in Genesis 7:24–8:2 that these fountains were open for 150 days. No wonder the ocean volume increased so much that the ocean waters flooded over the continents.

Second, if the ocean floor itself rose, it would then have effectively “pushed” up the sea level.

The Bible suggests a source of this rising sea floor: molten rock.

The catastrophic breakup of the earth’s crust, referred to in Genesis 7:11, would not only have released huge volumes of water from inside the earth, but much molten rock.5 The ocean floors would have been effectively replaced by hot lavas. Being less dense than the original ocean floors, these hot lavas would have had an expanded thickness, so the new ocean floors would have effectively risen, raising the sea level by more than 3,500 feet (1,067 m). Because today’s mountains had not yet formed, and it is likely the pre-Flood hills and mountains were nowhere near as high as today’s mountains, a sea level rise of over 3,500 feet would have been sufficient to inundate the pre-Flood continental land surfaces.

Toward the end of the Flood, when the molten rock cooled and the ocean floors sank, the sea level would have fallen and the waters would have drained off the continents into new, deeper ocean basins. As indicated earlier, Psalm 104:8 describes the mountains being raised at the end of the Flood and the Flood waters draining down valleys and off the emerging new land surfaces. This is consistent with much evidence that today’s mountains only very recently rose to their present incredible heights.

Posted Image

What geological results would a yearlong worldwide flood leave? A global, catastrophic flood, would produce fossils showing signs of being rapidly and catastrophically deposited by water. But how would you detect this? What differences should be observed between fossils produced by a flood over one year, and the slow death, burial and accumulation, so often used to illustrate how fossils are believed to have formed.

During a walk along the beach you are bound to come across the type of shells shown in the following photograph.
Posted Image
These bivalve lamellibranch shells are very common on beaches and are usually dead. Now look at the following photos of fossilized lamellibranch shells.
Posted Image
'What is the difference?' you ask. When next you go walking along the beach, or skin-diving, notice one thing about the living or dead present-day shells—they are there as part of an ecosystem. Along with the dead or living shells are a variety of dead or living plants and animals. Observe the following photo of fossil shells:
Posted Image
Note that it is not simply a buried ecosystem. Whatever the shell lived with or wherever it lived, its environment and its companions are not preserved. These shells are buried alone. They have been washed to where they are now buried. At the same time their previous life companions have not been washed to this location.

Only a current which had considerable sorting power could do this, i.e. it flowed for a significant distance and had significant force to sort out objects of a particular shape, texture and density and then drop them in a new location.

#14 Bex

Bex

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1066 posts
  • Interests:God, creation, friends/family, animals, health topics, auto/biographies, movies (horror, comedy, drama, whatever, just as long as it's good), music, video games (mainly survival horror, or survival/adventure types), crossword puzzles, books on real life crime/serial killers/etc. Prophecy/miracles/supernatural/hauntings etc, net surfing/forums etc.<br /><br />One of my favourite forums for information on many topics:<br /><br />http://orbisvitae.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php?ubb=cfrm
  • Age: 38
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • New Zealand

Posted 06 April 2009 - 12:18 AM

Continued.......

Study the following photos of a shell from the beach or sea floor and a fossilized shell. One more distinction is obvious in many cases.
Posted Image
Posted Image
All shells shown are dead, but the fossil shell is shut, whereas most present dead beach shells are open. When a lamellibranch dies, its muscles relax and the shell automatically opens. The connecting ligament decays and the shells separate into halves and then proceed to break up into fragments. However, the fossil specimens shown are closed. Only one conclusion is possible: these shells were buried alive.

In attempting to explain how the shells got there, we are really trying to postulate what type of conditions could:

A: Enter an environment
B: Remove some or all of the occupants, both plant and animal
C: Sort out the objects
D: Dump the objects into deposits of the same type of organisms
E: Bury the organisms with sediment
F: Achieve all of this before the shells died and opened
G: Solidify the deposit before the pressure of sediment caused deformation

To insist as do many geologists that shell deposits of this type were buried over eons of time where they lived, is not a viable explanation. The observable data (fossil remains and behavior of present dead shells) is only consistent with a rapid and catastrophic flood type of deposition.

Precautions: When you discover a single bed or deposit of shells like the ones described in this article, you have not proved a worldwide flood. But the more deposits we find which can only be explained on the basis of "catastrophe", then the more geology will be made to work within a flood framework rather than an evolutionary one.

Research for Those Who are Interested:

A: Would this argument using lamellibranch shells be valid if we tried it on Brachiopoda shells?
B: Do any fossil shell deposits show evidence of being buried ecosystems?
Posted Image


Conclusion

The fossilized sea creatures and plants found in rock layers thousands of feet above sea level are thus silent testimonies to the ocean waters that flooded over the continents, carrying billions of sea creatures, which were then buried in the sediments these ocean waters deposited. This is how billions of dead marine creatures were buried in rock layers all over the earth.

We know that the cataclysmic Genesis Flood was an actual event in history because God tells us so in His record, the Bible. Now we can also see persuasive evidences that support what the Bible has so clearly taught all along.

Sources:
http://www.answersin...y-sea-creatures
http://www.answersin...3/i2/shells.asp

#15 SeeJay

SeeJay

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 310 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 45
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Sydney, Australia

Posted 06 April 2009 - 12:27 AM

Source material:

*'Discovery Volumes' by Wyatt Archaeological Research. 713 Lambert Drive Nashville, TN 37220

*'The Ark Conspiracy' By Jonathan Gray. Published by Australian Seminar Services PO Box 3370 Grenfell Street. Adelaide, South Australia 5000.

*'Discoveries: Questions Answered' By Jonathan Gray.

View Post


Dear Bex.

Just in the interests of full information about this topic, people should note that the truthfulness and reliability of both Ron Wyatt and Jonathan Gray have been strongly criticised by the creationist organisation Answers in Genesis, particularly in the area of the ark "discoveries". This information is thus not to be trusted. See here and here.

Kind regards--SeeJay

#16 Bex

Bex

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1066 posts
  • Interests:God, creation, friends/family, animals, health topics, auto/biographies, movies (horror, comedy, drama, whatever, just as long as it's good), music, video games (mainly survival horror, or survival/adventure types), crossword puzzles, books on real life crime/serial killers/etc. Prophecy/miracles/supernatural/hauntings etc, net surfing/forums etc.<br /><br />One of my favourite forums for information on many topics:<br /><br />http://orbisvitae.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php?ubb=cfrm
  • Age: 38
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • New Zealand

Posted 06 April 2009 - 12:35 AM

Dear Bex.

Just in the interests of full information about this topic, people should note that the truthfulness and reliability of both Ron Wyatt and Jonathan Gray have been strongly criticised by the creationist organisation Answers in Genesis, particularly in the area of the ark "discoveries". This information is thus not to be trusted. See here and here.

Kind regards--SeeJay

View Post


Hi SeeJay,

Dr Kent H*vind, among others, as well as explorers who have confirmed Wyatt's discoveries leave little doubt about their authenticity. With due regard for the work of CMI (Creation Ministries International) and other areas regarding origins, it is evident that in this area there could be a more than a little old fashioned bigotry, blindness and denial.

I await somebody to address the undeniable evidence from well over 250 cultures around the world referring to a great flood (not floods, but a WORLDWIDE flood) and would somebody kindly address the problem of marine fossils near the peak of Mt Everest. I await the comments on both undeniable issues.

#17 SeeJay

SeeJay

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 310 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 45
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Sydney, Australia

Posted 06 April 2009 - 01:45 AM

Hi SeeJay,

Dr Kent H*vind, among others, as well as explorers who have confirmed Wyatt's discoveries leave little doubt about their authenticity.  With due regard for the work of CMI (Creation Ministries International) and other areas regarding origins, it is evident that in this area there could be a more than a little old fashioned bigotry, blindness and denial. 

I await somebody to address the undeniable evidence from well over 250 cultures around the world referring to a great flood (not floods, but a WORLDWIDE flood) and would somebody kindly address the problem of marine fossils near the peak of Mt Everest.  I await the comments on both undeniable issues.

View Post


Hi Bex.

(Are we not allowed to say Kent H*vind on this board? What is the reason?)

I can only again refer you and other readers to the carefully researched articles I posted, showing Wyatt's claims to either outright fabrications, or extremely dubious. It is particularly telling that Wyatt would not hand over samples of the "fossilised wood" for testing by fellow creationists. It would have been a simple matter to prove or disprove the existence of "bigotry, blindness and denial" merely by submitting the evidence to proper scientific testing.

I cannot agree with you that it is proper to use such discredited claims for any purpose. I urge you to reconsider.

Regards -- SeeJay

#18 Bex

Bex

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1066 posts
  • Interests:God, creation, friends/family, animals, health topics, auto/biographies, movies (horror, comedy, drama, whatever, just as long as it's good), music, video games (mainly survival horror, or survival/adventure types), crossword puzzles, books on real life crime/serial killers/etc. Prophecy/miracles/supernatural/hauntings etc, net surfing/forums etc.<br /><br />One of my favourite forums for information on many topics:<br /><br />http://orbisvitae.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php?ubb=cfrm
  • Age: 38
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • New Zealand

Posted 06 April 2009 - 02:19 AM

Hi Bex.

(Are we not allowed to say Kent H*vind on this board? What is the reason?)

I can only again refer you and other readers to the carefully researched articles I posted, showing Wyatt's claims to either outright fabrications, or extremely dubious. It is particularly telling that Wyatt would not hand over samples of the "fossilised wood" for testing by fellow creationists. It would have been a simple matter to prove or disprove the existence of "bigotry, blindness and denial" merely by submitting the evidence to proper scientific testing.

I cannot agree with you that it is proper to use such discredited claims for any purpose. I urge you to reconsider.

Regards -- SeeJay

View Post


SeeJay,

(I'm not sure about the censorship of Kent H*vind).

To address your comments on Ron Wyatt and the fossilised wood? The fossilised wood was handed over to an acredited lab in America. Ron Wyatt had numerous witnesses present. It was video taped and certified by a reputable lab. I have the video, I've seen the video tape where the lab technicians read out the results of testing. But that was not good enough for the creationists. I can assure you it was good enough for any person who saw the video. It has been widely distributed.

If you wish for further details of this well publicised and confirmed lab test, then I refer you to go and look for Ron Wyatt or Jonathon Gray's website! Both of which provide actual documentation of this well publicised lab test.

I can only trust in your sincere curiosity and open mindedness in this matter. Since you have investigated any negatives you could find, one would assume you'd be just as interested in investigating the other side........You may find it as compelling as I did, even in the face of the opposition. I put myself on the line to defend Ron Wyatt, as I am well aware of those who attempt to discredit him, but I cannot so readily sweep aside the findings/evidences.

I urge you to reconsider.

#19 SeeJay

SeeJay

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 310 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 45
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Sydney, Australia

Posted 06 April 2009 - 06:43 AM

SeeJay, 

(I'm not sure about the censorship of Kent H*vind).

To address your comments on Ron Wyatt and the fossilised wood?  The fossilised wood was handed over to an acredited lab in America.  Ron Wyatt had numerous witnesses present.  It was video taped and certified by a reputable lab.  I have the video, I've seen the video tape where the lab technicians read out the results of testing.  But that was not good enough for the creationists.  I can assure you it was good enough for any person who saw the video. It has been widely distributed.

If you wish for further details of this well publicised and confirmed lab test, then I refer you to go and look for Ron Wyatt or Jonathon Gray's website!  Both of which provide actual documentation of this well publicised lab test.


Hi again Bex.

I visited Wyatt's website, as you recommended. Just the page on laboratory analysis (here) contains obvious mischaracterisations of the evidence:

- Carbon is abundant in all sorts of soils and rocks. The "inside" vs "outside" measurements of carbon fall well within the normal range of carbon for soil and rock, and thus tell us absolutely nothing about whether there was once wood or any other organic material there.

- Similarly, the measurement of 0.7% organic carbon is completely meaningless. There are hundreds of possible ways for a sample of soil or rock to contain organic carbon without it being a sample of decayed or fossilised wood -- for example, it may contain fragments of organic soil.

The only way to be sure the sample is wood (fossilised or otherwise) is to take a thin slice of the sample, stick it under a microscope, and look for the cellular structure of wood. This is a very simple, very cheap procedure.

I can only trust in your sincere curiosity and open mindedness in this matter.  Since you have investigated any negatives you could find, one would assume you'd be just as interested in investigating the other side........You may find it as compelling as I did, even in the face of the opposition.  I put myself on the line to defend Ron Wyatt, as I am well aware of those who attempt to discredit him, but I cannot so readily sweep aside the findings/evidences.

I urge you to reconsider.

View Post


I did investigate both sides. It was very clear to me that Ron Wyatt's claims did not have the weight of observed, factual evidence on their side.

It is up to those supporting Wyatt to make their case. Why not submit the samples for proper testing? There is only one reasonable explanation for this, and that is that the people who have the samples do not want to risk having their claims disproven.

Add to this the fact that many of Wyatt's previously close colleagues, who participated in research with him on the suspected Ark, have since clearly and publicly announced that there is no merit to any of Wyatt's claims in this area. In fact several of them have accused Wyatt of outright fraud (Note: I in no way endorse this, I am merely reporting their statements).

My point is not about whether Wyatt is right or wrong, or whether that is the real Ark. Instead, my point is that you undermine your own argument by appealing to claims that are widely regarded as discredited, even within the evangelical community. First the claims should be established using proper scientific methods, then they can be used legitimately to support your position. But not the other way round.

Thanks and regards--SeeJay

#20 scott

scott

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1749 posts
  • Age: 21
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • mississippi

Posted 06 April 2009 - 07:04 AM

Hi again Bex.

I visited Wyatt's website, as you recommended. Just the page on laboratory analysis (here) contains obvious mischaracterisations of the evidence:

- Carbon is abundant in all sorts of soils and rocks. The "inside" vs "outside" measurements of carbon fall well within the normal range of carbon for soil and rock, and thus tell us absolutely nothing about whether there was once wood or any other organic material there.

- Similarly, the measurement of 0.7% organic carbon is completely meaningless. There are hundreds of possible ways for a sample of soil or rock to contain organic carbon without it being a sample of decayed or fossilised wood -- for example, it may contain fragments of organic soil.

The only way to be sure the sample is wood (fossilised or otherwise) is to take a thin slice of the sample, stick it under a microscope, and look for the cellular structure of wood. This is a very simple, very cheap procedure.
I did investigate both sides. It was very clear to me that Ron Wyatt's claims did not have the weight of observed, factual evidence on their side.

It is up to those supporting Wyatt to make their case. Why not submit the samples for proper testing? There is only one reasonable explanation for this, and that is that the people who have the samples do not want to risk having their claims disproven.

Add to this the fact that many of Wyatt's previously close colleagues, who participated in research with him on the suspected Ark, have since clearly and publicly announced that there is no merit to any of Wyatt's claims in this area. In fact several of them have accused Wyatt of outright fraud (Note: I in no way endorse this, I am merely reporting their statements).

My point is not about whether Wyatt is right or wrong, or whether that is the real Ark. Instead, my point is that you undermine your own argument by appealing to claims that are widely regarded as discredited, even within the evangelical community. First the claims should be established using proper scientific methods, then they can be used legitimately to support your position. But not the other way round.

Thanks and regards--SeeJay

View Post


Yes, but you are an evolutionist worshipper, so how are we supposed to trust you, or your sources??? Evolutionist are known for lying, and being untrustworthy... about 99.9% of the time, simply because atheist are evil, and they hate God. Again you need to provide sufficient proof, and evidence for your claims, which such you have not provided, only bias.

Also it is extremely easy like you said to test petrified wood to see if it is wood. Anyways some petrified wood I have in my home state is half fossilized, and half non-fossilized. Petrified wood is easily discernable.

In all reality all evolutionist across the globe, to protect the atheist faith, have to claim all creationist as frauds, so you see, there is only one right, one wrong... I choose creationism, you choose evolutionism. So basically both view each other the same way, so claiming your bias gets us nowhere, when we see each other as frauds anyways... you must show the evidence against the evidence presented... understand??? Good.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users