Lcash

While that may be interesting, it is not a nail in anything. There are several subsets of creationism and the only one this effects is young earth creationism. Lcash

yes I do. There is nothing scientifically that would prevent them from building an Ark that could house the animals needed for their purposes. We are not talking about ship sized boats here. Just large enough for the domestic animals and food animals. One thing to remember about this time (Whenever it was) the people on the Ark lost whatever technological advances there were to that point. Basically they would have to start over in their technology and we do not know how advanced they were at that point. Imagine if you and your immediate family were the only survivors of a catastrophic flood. Would you be able to replicate the technology you are used to having? Lcash

What would have been the outlet(s) for this flood? I am having a heck of a time imagining the flood waters reaching thousands of feet in height. If one would imagine the world Noah lived in was on the shallow floor of what is now the Mediteranean sea then the water would not have to be thousands of feet high to cover all the high mountains that Noah saw and was fimiliar with. The shores of the present day Mediteranean to Noah woud have been High Mountains. So the terrestrial flooding would only have to cover the hills of Ararat in Turkey where it is reported that the Ark came to rest. This also lessens the number of animals that Noah had to have on board the Ark as all he needed were the regionaly unique animals and the animals needed for food and domestication. Lcash

I think you meant Francium, right? If the flood was local rather than global, why the need to gather all those animals? And couldn't they have simply moved to a non-flood area, instead of needing to build a huge boat? Yes you are correct and it is 22 minutes not seconds. (I was half asleep when I wrote that.) A flood for Noah would necessitate his bringing all the animals for his surival. These could be used for agriculture and food sources. As for moving out by foot, the walls of the Mediteranean would have been unpassable for Noah and his family. It is like a huge wall surrounding everyone. A boat would be the only way to escape the onrushing waters. Lcash

The polonium issue is due to a study by Gentry. He discounted the effect of radon gas which is abundant in certain geologic rock such as granite and it also migrates causing halo's. Here is a link to a site refuting the polonium halo effect. http://homepage.mac.com/cygnusx1/pohalo/index.html Lcash

The Word of God doesn't need to be "reconciled" with any whimsical human speculation no one can say exactly what processes may have occurred at the Creation, it's completely outside the realm of human knowledge/reference, and the little PhD geologists don't have the slightest clue So why give us anonymous quotes? Lcash

Here is a better article of reconciling Genesis with modern science. The idea that the flood was the re-filling of the Mediteranean is not mine. It was from a geophysicist name Glenn Morton. Here is a link to a paper he wrote on the subject. http://home.entouch.net/dmd/synop.htm Lcash

Now let me explain the question I asked about short half-lived radioisotopes. A short life is the amount of time it would take for an element to decay to one half of it's original mass. Neptunium has a half life of 2.14million years. If the earth were young there would be an abundance of neptunium in the earths crust. It is an isotope derived from uranium. Only trace amounts are found in nature around uranium deposits. Since there are no deposits of nepeunium that is an indicator that the earth is atleast 20,000,000 years old. This is just an example of the dating techneques that are used to judge the age of the earth.. It presents a problem for YEC's because they cannot explain it away. Using these and other measures the earth is ~4.5 billion years old. How can we know for sure that half-life remains constant? willingtodie, We know tht half-lives remain constant because in the lab we have created extremely short half live elements as short as seconds. It is measurable and repeatable. Fresno Joe, We have radioactive elements that have lost their radioactivity and it decays into other elements. Each element has it's own half life based on its own shedding of radiation. Some have half lives that are extremely long such as Uranium 238 which has a half-life of 4.46 billion years so we are almost to half of the uranium 238 than there was at the beginning of the earth. and some are extremely short such as Franconium with a half life of 22 seconds. I am not a physicist so I have not done the calculations you are asking about. The idea that we don't understand the decay rate is a non-starter. Most nuclear technology is built around understanding the decay rate of the elements. If it did not work then radiation therapy would not work, neither would most nuclear medicine, nuclear weapons, etc. Lcash

Would the waters have gotten so high that they covered mountains?? Yes. A flood caused by the re-filling of the mediteranean very well could have covered mountains. The ground water in the surrounding coasts would have to rise and actualy gush forth due to the increased pressure. Since before this flood there was no rain which would be logical due to the local wind patterns over the european continent (some areas adjacent to mountains with similar wind patterns have not had rain in the last 400 years in Peru). The suden uprising of super moist air from the rushing water would have caused torrential rain over the entire Mediteranean area that could have lasted for months. Now we get to the definition of mountains. The area of the Med that could have supported a popultion is around the present day coast. To them the coast itself is the high mountain because from their perspective that is what it looks like. The waters would also be able to take the Ark north and deposit in the hills of Ararat. Lcash

The main flaw in a local riverine flood is the speed it moves and the direction. If it flows as usual then Noah winds up in Africa not turkey. Mt Ararat is in Turkey. Also it says the hills of ararat which is the name of the entire region not just the one mountain. The flood lasted for 1 year and moved the Ark North to turkey and the only explainattion for that would be the refilling of the dessicated Mediteranean sea. Lcash

What are the assumptions behind this claim? Let's examine them. 55 million years ago? Did you mean 5.5 million years ago? check this out: http://www.asa3.org/archive/evolution/199808/0134.html I know Glenn. We have worked the same fields. He is a great source for this and is the author I followed for the theory of Noah's Ark. It did not originate with me. Have you read Glen's testimony? It is a sad story of how the church treats Christians who do not toe the line on orthodox thinking. You got me 5.5 million. Sorry The assumptions behind the claim for the amount of neptunium is that it is a naturaly occuring isotope similar to Uranium. The differense is that it has a much shorter half life than Uranium. There are still vast quantities of uranium found all over the world but not Neptunium. The half life is too short and it has all dispeared. Except for the trace amounts around uuranium mines. Having a longer half life it should be as abundant as uranium. Lcash

Now let me explain the question I asked about short half-lived radioisotopes. A short life is the amount of time it would take for an element to decay to one half of it's original mass. Neptunium has a half life of 2.14million years. If the earth were young there would be an abundance of neptunium in the earths crust. It is an isotope derived from uranium. Only trace amounts are found in nature around uranium deposits. Since there are no deposits of nepeunium that is an indicator that the earth is atleast 20,000,000 years old. This is just an example of the dating techneques that are used to judge the age of the earth.. It presents a problem for YEC's because they cannot explain it away. Using these and other measures the earth is ~4.5 billion years old. As for Noah, i believe that Adam was uch further back in the linege of homo sapiens an probably was what we call a caveman. Astolopithicus (sp) The flood of the Mediteranean sea happened ove 55 million years ago and this explains every condition raised in the book of Genesis including the lack of rain. Later tomorrow. Lcash

Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, & Deuteronomy are not considered books of poetry though, they are considered history. Do you respect, and trust, the history books written by men? Why not trust and respect the books of history written by God? That's something I do not understand. Adults expect children to simply accept the words written in their history books, they themselves accept those very words, however flawed they may be. Yet when it comes to the Word of God, even Christians question every jot and tittle, doing their best to discredit it. Makes no sense to me whatsoever. For your information, I do not question the writing of Genesis or any of the other books. However when I see evidence that the interpretation I have been taught is wrong i question the interpretation. So you see I am not nearly as evil as most YEC's believe. I do question the interpretation and one thing I have noticed among most YEC's is that they are of the opinion that not only is the scripture infallible (I agree there) but that their interpretation is also infallible (I do NOT agree there). Lcash

What's the matter? Answers in Genesis doesn't address this problem? Lcash It probably does, you have access to their website same as I do. You can look it up same as I can. Good luck. Well I guess the greeting was premature. I am not in a debate with AIG. I am though in a debate here on this forum where the only answers so far have been links to AIG. Lcash

What's the matter? Answers in Genesis doesn't address this problem? Lcash

One question for the Young Earth Creationists. Why are there no short half lifed radioisotopes in the earths crust? Short lived such as 2 million years. Lcash

and all you do is speculate from a naturalostic/agnostic/secular world view.. it's an impasse...mutually exclusive views...so we may as well agree to disagree, if you reject the Bible, I have to ask why you're here Do you ever get something right? I am a Christian and have been for longer than you have probably been alive judging from the immature nature of your posts. I find it amazing to see God's creation through the perspective of science. It is not opposed to Christ. Lcash

how this qualifies you to talk about the ancient history of this planet, I have no idea....I plan and design groundwater recovery wells, and have for well over a decade, but I don't claim to be any expert on the history of this earth, aside from what God has revealed the sheer arrogance of these pundits/"experts" in 2008 is astounding to me Maybe it's because of the training I recieved in order to get where I am. Also the amount of deposits and geological material I have spent years looking at in a microscope. I have recovered fossils from all over the world at depths that show the earth is far older than 6000 years and show no evidence for a global flood. So far all you have done is give us links to AIG. If you have an argument then make it but if all you want to do is fight I have better things to do. Lcash

an oil driller is going to teach me about the ancient history of this earth? hardly.... no, there is ONE witness of the ancient history of this earth...only one...and millions of flapping gums, spouting speculations and random opinions/conjecture... here today and six feet under tomorrow....so much wind through canyon walls I'll take the 3500 year Word of the Almighty, what God has declared through His servant Moses, with whom he spoke FACE TO FACE, over ANY puny human being, and it's tragic I have to explain this on a so-called "Christian" message board...absolutely tragic, I'm used to it on pagan forums, but this is ridiculous then again, these are the last days, and many apostates have gone out into the world 2 Timothy 4 In the presence of God and of Christ Jesus, who will judge the living and the dead, and in view of his appearing and his kingdom, I give you this charge: Preach the Word; be prepared in season and out of season; correct, rebuke and encourage - with great patience and careful instruction. For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths. But you, keep your head in all situations, endure hardship, do the work of an evangelist, discharge all the duties of your ministry. welcome to 2008 and beyond...but we are victorious over all who oppose the Truth Well you continue to get things wrong. I am NOT an oil driller. I plan the wells, I do the geology for the resevoir and planning and executing the completion plans. I hold several patents in new technologies in the field. If you wish to continue this conversation I would suggest not trying to make this personal. Lcash

lol is this the best you have? I would encourage you to join the TJ forum and get schooled http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/tectonics.asp What is the TJ forum? AIG is not a reliable resource for geology information. I make my living doing geology for oil companies the world over and am very successful at it. I work with fluids under pressure an as far as 5.5 miles underground every day so I do know what I am talking about. Lcash

Catastrophic plate tectonics causing the flood is referred to as Hydroplate theory. It was developed by an engineer to try and explain the flood as proposed by young earth creationists. It has many many many flaws:\ 1. The subteranean water is under very high pressure and very hot due to the depth he claims this water is in. Once released it would rush to the surface and as the pressure was released it would have turned to explosive steam. This shot of steam would have shot clear through the atmosphere and into space due to the pressure and speed. This would have no chance of condensing into rain or anything else in the atmosphere. 2. The violence caused by plate movement in the flood would have caused tsunami's that make the Indonesian tsunami look like a ripple in a swimming pool. The Ark would never have survived the surging water. 3. The heat from the released water in Item #1 would have boiled the fish and caused the people and animals in the Ark to die from heat. There are better theories concerning the flood that still line up with what it says in Genesis and with science. However, one must realize that the terms used to say earth or under heaven in many ancient Hebrew writings mean everything or people that they know or are familiar with. Later in the old testament it states that All the nations had heard of Israels exploits and were afraid. Now I am sure that the Native Americans at that time had never heard of Israel. Nor were they afraid. Lcash

No my specialty is in Oil and gas stratagraphy. I never paid much attention to coal. However, I would not discount the idea of young coal deposits but it would have to meet some very special conditions for that to occur. Heat, and compression are 2 that I can think of off the top of my head. Lcash

sorry, but it means exactly what it says, the best scholars all agree with me, not some random talking head on an internet forum I've debated these issues for over 15 years, believe me, I've heard every lame attack on the scripture there is, you present nothing new, same trivial, flawed, illogical, unreasoning, liberal, secular, strawman arguments the Book stands, 3500 years and counting If you have been making this argument for 15 years then certainly you can come up with some facts which support a global flood. Sounds to me like you are a believer in Hydroplate theory where there was a massive shift in the tectonic plates and the layer of subteranean water burst forth from the ground. Is this what you believe? Lcash

First off you have not provided any evidence. The fossil record does not indicate any global flood, neither does the ice ages (there were more than one) deep oil and coal is certainly not evidence of a global flood, as a matter of fact it works to the advantage of those who say there was no global flood. Marine fossils on mountain tops only indicates that before the upthrust of the earths crust, these mountains were once on the sea floor. This includes Mt Everest wich is a result of the Indian sub-continent colliding with the asian continent causing an upthrust and pushing the mountains up. Catastrophic tectonic plate activity certainly is not evidence of a global flood. If you really think that there was a massive tectonic plate movent during the flood then you know nothing about tectonic plate theory. The violoence on the waters would have destroyed the Ark and everything in it including Noah. Now, how do you explain the fact that the scripture does not talk about the fish kill that would have happened with a fresh water flood that covered the whole earth by rain and groundwater? It would have been massive. Lcash