dad2 Posted January 22, 2023 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 18 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 1,504 Content Per Day: 0.97 Reputation: 184 Days Won: 0 Joined: 01/28/2020 Status: Offline Share Posted January 22, 2023 It is very probable that the ark landed when the continents were still together. It is also likely that the tower of Babel happened ((over a century after the flood year) on the supercontinent. That would make it easy for man and animals and plants to migrate to the various areas and what are now separate continents. Something changed quickly and the continents separated, carrying all the people and life on them. This seems to have happened at the same time as the lifespans of men dropping suddenly and drastically. (the best plotting of when lifespans changed points not to the flood but the time of Peleg) It was also in the days of Peleg that the bible says that the world was split or divided. That includes nations and languages, but many also believe it includes the physical division of the land masses. This thread is to discuss the scientific or historical aspects of this. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teddyv Posted January 22, 2023 Group: Royal Member Followers: 6 Topic Count: 6 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 4,264 Content Per Day: 2.93 Reputation: 2,302 Days Won: 1 Joined: 05/03/2020 Status: Offline Share Posted January 22, 2023 What is your scientific and/or historical evidence? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dad2 Posted January 23, 2023 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 18 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 1,504 Content Per Day: 0.97 Reputation: 184 Days Won: 0 Joined: 01/28/2020 Status: Offline Author Share Posted January 23, 2023 22 hours ago, teddyv said: What is your scientific and/or historical evidence? History shows people and animals did end up in various continents. The scientific basis for assuming there were no men in the time of the supercontinent is based on beliefs alone. For example the fossil record. There is no reason to assume that the world and how it used to work was the same as today. It is possible that most animals and man for whatever reasons could not leave remains. Therefore looking at the remains we find fossilized as some grand picture of all the life that lived in a given era would be totally wrong and absolutely slewed. What scientific basis do you have for saying that the world and laws were the same as now? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teddyv Posted January 23, 2023 Group: Royal Member Followers: 6 Topic Count: 6 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 4,264 Content Per Day: 2.93 Reputation: 2,302 Days Won: 1 Joined: 05/03/2020 Status: Offline Share Posted January 23, 2023 18 minutes ago, dad2 said: History shows people and animals did end up in various continents. Sure. Quote The scientific basis for assuming there were no men in the time of the supercontinent is based on beliefs alone. For example the fossil record. The fossil record is a belief? It's a rather tangible, objective example of preservation of previous living organisms. Perhaps you mean that someone's interpretation of the record could be subject to their beliefs. Young Earth Creationists, for example, have to fit the fossil record withiin a short time period, based on a pre-existing belief. Most paleontologists and paleoanthropologists read the fossil record within in a progression of time based on the ancient earth which is supported through various strands of data. Quote There is no reason to assume that the world and how it used to work was the same as today. Why not? If we peer out into the universe we see the same laws of physics are in play. Quote It is possible that most animals and man for whatever reasons could not leave remains. Therefore looking at the remains we find fossilized as some grand picture of all the life that lived in a given era would be totally wrong and absolutely slewed. Of course not all organisms will leave remains. But to date, there is no evidence of humans intermixed with dinosaurs. Quote What scientific basis do you have for saying that the world and laws were the same as now? See previous comment that the universe appears to be working in the past as it is now. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dad2 Posted January 23, 2023 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 18 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 1,504 Content Per Day: 0.97 Reputation: 184 Days Won: 0 Joined: 01/28/2020 Status: Offline Author Share Posted January 23, 2023 18 minutes ago, teddyv said: Sure. The fossil record is a belief? It's a rather tangible, objective example of preservation of previous living organisms. Perhaps you mean that someone's interpretation of the record could be subject to their beliefs. Young Earth Creationists, for example, have to fit the fossil record withiin a short time period, based on a pre-existing belief. Most paleontologists and paleoanthropologists read the fossil record within in a progression of time based on the ancient earth which is supported through various strands of data. The record is interpreted as if the present realities and nature existed always. They assume if there was a variety of life that this would be reflected in the remains we see in the fossil record. So yes it is belief based. If I use a different set of beliefs interpreting this evidence the result is wildly different. If I assume that, as the Almighty Personally said, man used to return to the ground we were created from, why would I assume we would have instead left fossilized remains first? A lot was different back in the world that was, such as man living well over over 9 centuries. How would we know what bacteria and array of little creatures /trilobites and etc etc used to exist that specialized in quickly disposing of certain corpses? Just because we don't see so much of that in the present time does not mean it was the same in Noah's day. How would we even know that the laws of nature were identical then? 18 minutes ago, teddyv said: Why not? If we peer out into the universe we see the same laws of physics are in play. Looking out there there is much we do not see! Time for example. Most of what we see we filter through beliefs. Red shifted light for example. Man assumes that what shifts light here where we have lived and experienced must be all that is available to be able to shift light out in the unknown universe. We see light coming in here to this earth and solar system area. At this time God has set up certain laws and forces to exist here. That is temporary. Just because we interpret incoming light based on these forces and laws and realities here, does not mean all that you were taught it means. 18 minutes ago, teddyv said: Of course not all organisms will leave remains. But to date, there is no evidence of humans intermixed with dinosaurs. See previous comment that the universe appears to be working in the past as it is now. God was talking to Adam when He said to dust he would return, not dinosaurs. We need not assume one size fits all. There is no reason to believe that all creatures would have decayed away in equal time in that former world. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teddyv Posted January 23, 2023 Group: Royal Member Followers: 6 Topic Count: 6 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 4,264 Content Per Day: 2.93 Reputation: 2,302 Days Won: 1 Joined: 05/03/2020 Status: Offline Share Posted January 23, 2023 1 minute ago, dad2 said: The record is interpreted as if the present realities and nature existed always. They assume if there was a variety of life that this would be reflected in the remains we see in the fossil record. So yes it is belief based. If I use a different set of beliefs interpreting this evidence the result is wildly different. If I assume that, as the Almighty Personally said, man used to return to the ground we were created from, why would I assume we would have instead left fossilized remains first? A lot was different back in the world that was, such as man living well over over 9 centuries. How would we know what bacteria and array of little creatures /trilobites and etc etc used to exist that specialized in quickly disposing of certain corpses? Just because we don't see so much of that in the present time does not mean it was the same in Noah's day. How would we even know that the laws of nature were identical then? It's a good thing that most bones do degrade, otherwise we'd be deep in them. 1 minute ago, dad2 said: Looking out there there is much we do not see! Time for example. Most of what we see we filter through beliefs. Red shifted light for example. Man assumes that what shifts light here where we have lived and experienced must be all that is available to be able to shift light out in the unknown universe. We see light coming in here to this earth and solar system area. At this time God has set up certain laws and forces to exist here. That is temporary. Just because we interpret incoming light based on these forces and laws and realities here, does not mean all that you were taught it means. So reality is unreliable? That's bad news. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dad2 Posted January 23, 2023 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 18 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 1,504 Content Per Day: 0.97 Reputation: 184 Days Won: 0 Joined: 01/28/2020 Status: Offline Author Share Posted January 23, 2023 42 minutes ago, teddyv said: It's a good thing that most bones do degrade, otherwise we'd be deep in them. So reality is unreliable? That's bad news. The reality today is that we live maybe 90 years or whatever. The reality in the days of the fathers was nothing like that. You seem to think that applying times that were not alike is all that is reliable. The issue is not whether things degrade. The issue regarding creation and former times is how fast they degraded. Bottom line is that you have no idea and therefore the fossil record is indeed belief. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WilliamL Posted January 27, 2023 Group: Royal Member Followers: 10 Topic Count: 99 Topics Per Day: 0.03 Content Count: 5,117 Content Per Day: 1.48 Reputation: 2,555 Days Won: 4 Joined: 11/06/2014 Status: Offline Birthday: 09/01/1950 Share Posted January 27, 2023 On 1/22/2023 at 12:04 PM, dad2 said: It is very probable that the ark landed when the continents were still together. It is also likely that the tower of Babel happened ((over a century after the flood year) on the supercontinent. ... Something changed quickly and the continents separated, carrying all the people and life on them. This seems to have happened at the same time as the lifespans of men dropping suddenly and drastically. (the best plotting of when lifespans changed points not to the flood but the time of Peleg) It was also in the days of Peleg that the bible says that the world was split or divided. That includes nations and languages, but many also believe it includes the physical division of the land masses. Your understanding about the time of Peleg is correct -- but that then contradicts your understanding about Babel, which came well afterward. The continents were already separated or separating by then. The name Peleg means Division, which means that that division of the earth must have already begun before was born, in order for his parents to affix him with that name. The continents probably separated more rapidly thereafter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dad2 Posted January 27, 2023 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 18 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 1,504 Content Per Day: 0.97 Reputation: 184 Days Won: 0 Joined: 01/28/2020 Status: Offline Author Share Posted January 27, 2023 1 hour ago, WilliamL said: Your understanding about the time of Peleg is correct -- but that then contradicts your understanding about Babel, which came well afterward. The continents were already separated or separating by then. Says -- who? Proof? 1 hour ago, WilliamL said: The name Peleg means Division, which means that that division of the earth must have already begun before was born, in order for his parents to affix him with that name. The continents probably separated more rapidly thereafter. The bible says in his days the earth was divided actually. Since Jewish tradition says that Peleg was about 6 years old at the time of Babel, that'll do er. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teddyv Posted January 27, 2023 Group: Royal Member Followers: 6 Topic Count: 6 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 4,264 Content Per Day: 2.93 Reputation: 2,302 Days Won: 1 Joined: 05/03/2020 Status: Offline Share Posted January 27, 2023 (edited) Suggesting that Pangaea only started separating some 4200-4300 years ago is fantasy. Edited January 28, 2023 by teddyv incorrect dates 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts