Christian Forums

Quote from: Rella on Tue Nov 19, 2024 - 07:37:55Question.

Leaving the bible out of the mix....

I totally agree that there is seeming evidence of floods from around the qworld.

What might the chances be that these assorted floods did not actually happen at the same time?

Even with carbon dating of things, they cannot pinpoint a specific year....

Or what might be the chance that where these assorted floods took place, it all was based on the Noah flood but only happened where life was at the time because God was cleansing the earth?

For sure... no fish, sea things died then... did they?

Records show that these floods did not occur at the same time, but even if they did, how can you explain that the peoples of these regions survived to write about it in their cultural records? 

Add to that, there are countries that do not have records of any mass flooding, yet their people lived before and after the biblical flood event. 

Quote from: Amo on Thu Nov 14, 2024 - 09:40:33So says one who has decided there is no depiction of a global flood anywhere in holy scripture, no testimony that supports a global flood anywhere concerning the last 6000 years or so the bible chronicles. You're world view will not even allow you to see what scripture plainly states, let alone what a modern science article might suggest or reveal in relation to the same.

How the heck could the authors of Genesis know that the flood they experienced covered regions of the world that they didn't even know existed? 

Quote from: 4WD on Tue Nov 19, 2024 - 07:20:51There are abundant evidences of floods throughout the global earth.  There are, however, places where there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever of a flood.  And there is absolutely no evidence of a global flood.

Not sure if true.  The Younger Dryas event would have caused the flooding of every coastline on earth.  But it wouldn't have topped every mountain.  Still, I would think of that as "global."

Quote from: Rella on Tue Nov 19, 2024 - 07:37:55For sure... no fish, sea things died then... did they?

Floods can/do kill aquatic-life.  It isn't just drowning that's the danger, it's the waves.

Quote from: 4WD on Tue Nov 19, 2024 - 11:23:06Certainly nothing from irc, answersingenesis, or globalflood.

All the evidence to be examined is the same. The only difference is concerning which lens of faith or discipline one chooses to view the evidence through.

Quote from: Alan on Wed Nov 20, 2024 - 10:02:45Records show that these floods did not occur at the same time, but even if they did, how can you explain that the peoples of these regions survived to write about it in their cultural records?

Add to that, there are countries that do not have records of any mass flooding, yet their people lived before and after the biblical flood event.

Seriously? You do not understand that if the flood account is true, that all the descendents of Noah's family would be based in such truth. The effects of which all would clearly see all around them for centuries no doubt. Even among those who might choose another faith or religion eventually.

Records would show evidence of many different floods and catastrophes after the big one, and as a result of or related to it.

The extent to which surviving testimonies of a great flood event exist, is strong evidence that such knowledge was wide spread. This says nothing of how many actual flood accounts and or oral cultural accounts have not survived. We simply do not know. We just know that a great many accounts have survived.   

Quote from: Alan on Wed Nov 20, 2024 - 10:06:24How the heck could the authors of Genesis know that the flood they experienced covered regions of the world that they didn't even know existed?

A pretty frank admission, that you do not believe the holy scriptures, to be divinely inspired. Limiting the knowledge of the writers themselves to their own knowledge and or abilities.

Is this not the case? Or do you really think God Himself is limited as we are, in knowing and revealing the truth of history? All history.

The link below discusses some of the many evidences of a global flood, sone deny exists.

https://biblicalscienceinstitute.com/geology/overview-of-geologic-evidence-of-the-flood/

Quote from: Amo on Thu Nov 21, 2024 - 08:20:31A pretty frank admission, that you do not believe the holy scriptures, to be divinely inspired. Limiting the knowledge of the writers themselves to their own knowledge and or abilities.

Is this not the case? Or do you really think God Himself is limited as we are, in knowing and revealing the truth of history? All history.

I believe the Holy Scriptures.  I do not believe your and your YEC buddies' interpretation of those scriptures.  There are no ancient Hebrew words that would mean "global flood" simply because they had no concept of a global earth. That is not God's knowing and revealing the truth of history.  That is your limited knowledge of the truth of history.

Quote from: 4WD on Fri Nov 22, 2024 - 05:10:25I believe the Holy Scriptures.  I do not believe your and your YEC buddies' interpretation of those scriptures.  There are no ancient Hebrew words that would mean "global flood" simply because they had no concept of a global earth. That is not God's knowing and revealing the truth of history.  That is your limited knowledge of the truth of history.

First, you are addressing my reply to Alan, not you. Second, and to the contrary, it is your own limited knowledge of history that leaves you in the dark. Among those scripture describes as ever learning but never able to come to a knowledge of the truth. This because you have rejected the light of God's word as the basis of all truth, and wandered after the vain imaginings of those the scriptures describe as heady, high-minded, boasters, prideful, lovers of themselves, more than lovers of God. Which is to say that they trust more in their own vain imaginings, than the straight testimonies of God's word.

It is your own version of history darkened by the counsels of the ungodly, that limits your own understanding. The Devil himself laughs fallen humanity to scorn, having them believing an exact opposite account of the facts of history in relation to mankind. He has duped them just as he duped Eve at the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. God said it was and will be one way, the Devil said no it is and will be another way. When the Lord appeared to Adam and Eve though, they clearly understood that God's word and testimony was the truth, and the devil's a lie. Just as it will be with God's account of the history of the creation, contradicted by humanities satanically inspired history as vainly imagined in the theory of evolution, when our Lord appears the second time unto judgement and or salvation.

Those who choose to believe that humanity came forth from some knuckle dragging ape like creatures, amidst an imaginary and continuous ascension of design and complexity by mechanisms of random chance, have been left in the dark concerning the scriptural truth of the matter. Or will you at least admit of God's direct involvement in these processes, making them at least tenable? Though still the work of the imaginations of men, contradicting the word of God.

Therefore do you believe in times of such abject ignorance of humanity in its supposed degraded forms of far lesser intellect while evolving. Rather than the image of God which scripture states we were created in. Therefore also do you suggest that humanity always believed as many of those of the literal dark ages believed. When holy scripture had been removed from the view of the people, and humanity had reached its dregs. That the world was flat, and having no knowledge of the globe. Ignoring also therefore all evidences of humanities great intellect and capabilities of the past, further back in time as one will go beyond the dark ages. When humanity was closer to the image of God in which they were created. The scriptures themselves even testifying of God's need to intervene, that the world would not once again rapidly descend into capabilities of such great evil (Gen 11:1-9). Calling forth the judgments of God unto destruction and annihilation before God's own appointed time. Or do you admit, that something happened which impeded the progress of humanity as scripture relates, and we physically, intellectually, socially, and scientifically devolved as it were, for a time?

And if such be true, as holy scripture testifies, what is humanity today, believing they are at their highest evolutionary development at present? But the deluded, arrogant, vain, prideful, puffed up, heady, high minded, lovers of self, which holy scripture so accurately describes. The theory of evolution itself being believed by so many, contributing heavily to our present deplorable condition. As holy scripture describes for the last days.

2Pe 3:1 This second epistle, beloved, I now write unto you; in both which I stir up your pure minds by way of remembrance: 2 That ye may be mindful of the words which were spoken before by the holy prophets, and of the commandment of us the apostles of the Lord and Saviour: 3 Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts, 4 And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation. 5 For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water: 6 Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished: 7 But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.

2Ti 3:1 This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come. 2 For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, 3 Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, 4 Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God; 5 Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away.

And what greater power has God ever demonstrated regarding this world, as holy scripture records,  but its creation in six days.

Rev 14:6 And I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people, 7 Saying with a loud voice, Fear God, and give glory to him; for the hour of his judgment is come: and worship him that made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and the fountains of waters. 8 And there followed another angel, saying, Babylon is fallen, is fallen, that great city, because she made all nations drink of the wine of the wrath of her fornication. 9 And the third angel followed them, saying with a loud voice, If any man worship the beast and his image, and receive his mark in his forehead, or in his hand, 10 The same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation; and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb: 11 And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever: and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name. 12 Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus. 13 And I heard a voice from heaven saying unto me, Write, Blessed are the dead which die in the Lord from henceforth: Yea, saith the Spirit, that they may rest from their labours; and their works do follow them.

How can any evolutionist ever keep the fourth commandment of God, while denying exactly what it plainly states?

Quote from: Amo on Fri Nov 22, 2024 - 08:02:34This because you have rejected the light of God's word as the basis of all truth, and wandered after the vain imaginings of those the scriptures describe as heady, high-minded, boasters, prideful, lovers of themselves, more than lovers of God.

I  only have rejected the interpretations of the YEC such as you.  You have the deeply arrogant imaginings that your interpretations of God's word are actually God's word.

Quote from: 4WD on Sat Nov 23, 2024 - 05:41:57I  only have rejected the interpretations of the YEC such as you.  You have the deeply arrogant imaginings that your interpretations of God's word are actually God's word.

I sure hope all at least, all who profess Christ, believe the doctrines they accept as truth are in fact truth. Otherwise they have obviously chosen to believe lies.

Quote from: Amo on Sat Nov 23, 2024 - 09:07:11I sure hope all at least, all who profess Christ, believe the doctrines they accept as truth are in fact truth. Otherwise they have obviously chosen to believe lies.

That, of course, applies to all of us, including you. For what it is worth, I do not believe that the things discussed in this topic have much if anything to do with salvation and receiving eternal life.

Quote from: 4WD on Sat Nov 23, 2024 - 10:31:04That, of course, applies to all of us, including you. For what it is worth, I do not believe that the things discussed in this topic have much if anything to do with salvation and receiving eternal life.

Of course it applies to me as well. What do the scriptures say about the truth? What do they say is truth? What do they say is a lie? What do they say about lies and liars? What do they say about the fate of those who choose either or? What is the value of what you, or I, or any other sinner thinks apart from the revealed word and will of God? How long will such thoughts and beliefs last? What is the value of God's word, and how long will His words last?

The scriptures have a lot to say about the above questions. They are not very supportive of the idea that mankind can make what they wish of any of God's word, with impunity. There are serious consequences for those who would play with and or manipulate God's word. God's word is truth! Denying or manipulating it to one's own ends, is most certainly a salvific matter.

Quote from: Amo on Sun Nov 24, 2024 - 07:50:43They are not very supportive of the idea that mankind can make what they wish of any of God's word, with impunity.

Like you?

Quote from: 4WD on Sun Nov 24, 2024 - 13:49:55Like you?

 

Quote from: 4WD on Sun Nov 24, 2024 - 13:49:55Like you?

If I have, I will find out on that day. Just like you and all the rest of us.

Quote from: Amo on Thu Nov 21, 2024 - 10:30:04The link below discusses some of the many evidences of a global flood, sone deny exists.

https://biblicalscienceinstitute.com/geology/overview-of-geologic-evidence-of-the-flood/

And here is one of about a billion links that refute a global flood.

https://ncse.ngo/yes-noahs-flood-may-have-happened-not-over-whole-earth

Quote from: Amo on Thu Nov 21, 2024 - 08:20:31A pretty frank admission, that you do not believe the holy scriptures, to be divinely inspired. Limiting the knowledge of the writers themselves to their own knowledge and or abilities.

Is this not the case? Or do you really think God Himself is limited as we are, in knowing and revealing the truth of history? All history.

Divine inspired or not, they were still written by men that took it upon themselves to write what they believed to be the truth and the intent, all in another language that has difficulty translating to English. 

Quote from: Amo on Sun Nov 24, 2024 - 07:50:43.... is most certainly a salvific matter.

No it is not, the salvation issue is drawing a line in the sand and judging those that do not believe as you do. You have repeatedly done that, as if you are 100% correct in all of your assumptions. 

Quote from: Alan on Tue Nov 26, 2024 - 11:05:57And here is one of about a billion links that refute a global flood.

https://ncse.ngo/yes-noahs-flood-may-have-happened-not-over-whole-earth

Touché. I'll examine the claims of this article more closely and respond later.

Quote from: Alan on Tue Nov 26, 2024 - 11:12:57Divine inspired or not, they were still written by men that took it upon themselves to write what they believed to be the truth and the intent, all in another language that has difficulty translating to English.

And therefore, everything you believe according to "holy scripture" is in question as well. The book is therefore not holy, but likely highly inaccurate and suggestive at best. I do not share your view of course.

Quote from: Alan on Tue Nov 26, 2024 - 11:24:57No it is not, the salvation issue is drawing a line in the sand and judging those that do not believe as you do. You have repeatedly done that, as if you are 100% correct in all of your assumptions.

This based upon your previous presumption I just addressed, which we obviously disagree upon. My assumption is that holy scriptures provide a truthful and reliable historical and prophetic account. Your's is that they do not. My assumptions are built upon my faith in the accuracy of holy scripture, not my own thoughts. Your wavering faith as it seems to me, is built upon your presumption that scripture is not an accurate and or therefore truthful historical account.

Rom 10:17 So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.

If the word of God is shaky and inaccurate, then how can one's faith in it be anything otherwise?

Quote from: Amo on Wed Nov 27, 2024 - 09:02:33Your wavering faith as it seems to me, is built upon your presumption that scripture is not an accurate and or therefore truthful historical account.

Amo, you do not have the ability to make an assessment on another's faith. Your doing so is obnoxious, arrogant and thoroughly disgusting.

Quote from: 4WD on Wed Nov 27, 2024 - 09:55:10Amo, you do not have the ability to make an assessment on another's faith. Your doing so is obnoxious, arrogant and thoroughly disgusting.

No. It is actually very easy to tell if someone has faith in a statement or not. If they do not believe what is said, then they have no faith in it. Easy peasy.

Rom 10:16 But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Esaias saith, Lord, who hath believed our report? 17 So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.

God said -

Exo 20:8 Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. 9 Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work: 10 But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates: 11 For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.

If one does not believe what the above word of God simply states, then they have no faith that it is true. One can say they believe it, they just don't believe it happened  as stated, or not in six days. Then they still have no faith in what is said, the way it is said. They believe in something other than what God said, according to scripture. Easy peasy. It is not wrong to determine that one who does not accept a statement for what it simply says, has no faith in that statement. What is wrong with determining that one who does not believe a statement as made, has no faith in that statement.

Though faith certainly has deeper meaning than just belief, it also certainly includes belief. If one believes in deep time simple to complex evolution, then they have no faith in the fourth commandment. They do not believe what it says.

It would not be obnoxious, arrogant and or thoroughly disgusting, for you to say I have no faith in the theory of evolution. You would be right, because I do not believe it. Nor is it obnoxious, arrogant, and or thoroughly disgusting for me to determine that one who does not believe in the six day creation, has no faith in it. Or to determine such regarding other plain and simple statements of scripture, not believed by someone.

You are of course free to believe I am obnoxious, arrogant and thoroughly disgusting if you wish. So be it. Personally,  I find people who think they know exactly how things happened thousands, tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands, millions, and billions of years ago, somewhat arrogant and or obnoxious. Not disgusting though. They have a God given right to see things as they wish.

Psa 33:6 By the word of the LORD were the heavens made; and all the host of them by the breath of his mouth. 7 He gathereth the waters of the sea together as an heap: he layeth up the depth in storehouses. 8 Let all the earth fear the LORD: let all the inhabitants of the world stand in awe of him. 9 For he spake, and it was done; he commanded, and it stood fast.

I have faith that the above scriptures are truth. That is to say, I believe what they simply state. Do you? 

Quote from: Amo on Wed Nov 27, 2024 - 22:08:04No. It is actually very easy to tell if someone has faith in a statement or not. If they do not believe what is said, then they have no faith in it. Easy peasy.

Rom 10:16 But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Esaias saith, Lord, who hath believed our report? 17 So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.
As I said and now repeat.  Obnoxious, arrogant and thoroughly disgusting.

God said -

Exo 20:8 Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. 9 Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work: 10 But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates: 11 For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.

If one does not believe what the above word of God simply states, then they have no faith that it is true. One can say they believe it, they just don't believe it happened  as stated, or not in six days. Then they still have no faith in what is said, the way it is said. They believe in something other than what God said, according to scripture. Easy peasy. It is not wrong to determine that one who does not accept a statement for what it simply says, has no faith in that statement. What is wrong with determining that one who does not believe a statement as made, has no faith in that statement.

Though faith certainly has deeper meaning than just belief, it also certainly includes belief. If one believes in deep time simple to complex evolution, then they have no faith in the fourth commandment. They do not believe what it says.

It would not be obnoxious, arrogant and or thoroughly disgusting, for you to say I have no faith in the theory of evolution. You would be right, because I do not believe it. Nor is it obnoxious, arrogant, and or thoroughly disgusting for me to determine that one who does not believe in the six day creation, has no faith in it. Or to determine such regarding other plain and simple statements of scripture, not believed by someone.

You are of course free to believe I am obnoxious, arrogant and thoroughly disgusting if you wish. So be it. Personally,  I find people who think they know exactly how things happened thousands, tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands, millions, and billions of years ago, somewhat arrogant and or obnoxious. Not disgusting though. They have a God given right to see things as they wish.

Psa 33:6 By the word of the LORD were the heavens made; and all the host of them by the breath of his mouth. 7 He gathereth the waters of the sea together as an heap: he layeth up the depth in storehouses. 8 Let all the earth fear the LORD: let all the inhabitants of the world stand in awe of him. 9 For he spake, and it was done; he commanded, and it stood fast.

I have faith that the above scriptures are truth. That is to say, I believe what they simply state. Do you? 

https://squareonescience.com/evidence-of-a-global-flood/

Quoted article below from link above.

QuoteEVIDENCE OF A GLOBAL FLOOD

There is much evidence in support of a global flood like Noah's flood as described in Genesis chapters 7-8. There are many geological features and fossils which are hard to explain with uniformitarian theories, but are readily explained by a global flood catastrophe. Here we will examine the evidence from the oceans, mass extinction, fossils, geological features, and the geologic column.

The oceans

When we look at the oceans, which cover approximately 71 percent of the earth's surface with an average depth of 12,500 feet (Lutgens and Edward, 2006:9) we must invariably ask the question, "Where did the oceans come from?" Evolutionists try to answer this question by saying that possibly melted comets of ice or erupted underground sources of water filled the oceans over time. A global flood gives a much more plausible answer, which interestingly enough the Bible describes underground streams of water erupting and the floodgates of heaven opening to provide the water for the flood. Then, according to Psalm 104:6-9, the mountains rose and the valleys sank, and these valleys were filled with the flood water, which we now call oceans.

Mass extinction

Why did dinosaurs and so many other animals that we find in the fossil record become extinct? According to evolution, there were 6 major extinctions: Cambrian, Ordovician, Devonian, Permian, Triassic, and Cretaceous (Krogh, 2007:309). The Permian Extinction is said to have killed 96 percent of all species, possibly due to volcanic activity (Krogh, 2007:310). And the Cretaceous Extinction is said to have killed the dinosaurs due to an asteroid 6 miles in diameter striking the earth and causing a worldwide tsunami 150 meters high (Krogh, 2007:310). Evolutionists have to resort to catastrophic events like volcanic activity and asteroids to explain the extinctions, but wouldn't one major worldwide flood provide a more straightforward explanation?

Fossils

Uniformitarian fossil formation cannot explain how fragile features like water ripple marks or animal footprints could be preserved, since they had to be formed in soft sediment and would quickly be eroded (Morris, 2008:13). This means that such features had to be buried quickly in order to preserve their details, and this is what the flood would have done. Another thing the flood would explain is why certain fossilized animals were buried in fear, with their heads tilted back, mouths open, fins or wings extended, spines erect, etc (Bowden, 1982:207).

A very interesting fossil formation is the Fossil Lake area of the Green River Formation in Wyoming. One layer approximately 14-20 inches thick contains millions of fish with well-preserved details like skin and scales (Jackson, 1980:10). One evolutionary explanation for such a formation is that annual toxic algal blooms killed the fish which were then covered by a layer of calcium carbonate, and this would repeat annually (Jackson, 1980:12-13). But as Lawrence points out, dead fish float to the top and are then eaten or decomposed, they do not sink (Lee, 1979:5-6). Another challenge is that there are fish in this lake formation which do not belong where they are found. For instance, river and stream fish like Polydon as well as shallow water Notogoneus fish are found in deep water areas of the lake (Lee, 1979:6). The problem escalates since there are a variety of tree pollens from palm, fig, spruce, pine, oak, and maple trees found all mixed together in this fossil formation (Lee 1979:6). And the final slam comes from the fact that this formation contains fossils of fish swallowing other fish! In one fossil a Lepisosterus is swallowing a Diplomystus which has swallowed a Knightia (Lee, 1979:6). How do evolutionists explain this? Richard says, "Occasionally a specimen [of Diplomystus] is found with a Knightia still lodged in its mouth, showing that it met its doom by chocking on a morsel too large to swallow" (Jackson, 1980:14). So to put the picture together in evolutionary terms, one fish chokes on another fish, then their carcases defy normal behavior and sink instead of float, and they get buried on the bottom of the lake avoiding any decomposition? Evolutionary explanations can get very ridiculous if you ignore the simple alternative, that these fish were caught unexpectedly by a flood which rapidly covered them up with sediments. The preservation of scales and fins also suggests that these fish were buried rapidly before they could decompose (Lee, 1979:6).

Oil companies made a very interesting discovery while drilling frozen ground at Prudhoe Bay, Alaska. They found a frozen tropical forest between 1,100 and 1,700 feet down. "There are palm trees, pine trees, and tropical foliage in great profusion. In fact, they found them lapped all over each other, just as though they had fallen in that position" (Lindsey Williams, The Energy Non-Crisis, 2nd edition (Kasilof, Alaska: Worth Publishing Co., 1980), p.54) (Brown, 1996:107). What could give a better explanation than a global flood that toppled over the trees from around the world and deposited them in Alaska? Then, an oncoming ice age would freeze the trees in that state. It would be interesting to hear an evolutionary explanation of this phenomenon.

A family of five to seven hominids was found buried together, and the explanation given is that they were buried in a flash flood, possibly while resting or sleeping (Johanson, 1976:811). But they were found under 33 feet of mudstone and broken in small pieces, this is something a typical local flood can't explain, but a global flood can (Bowden, 1981:224).

Geological features

There are many geological features which are better explained by a catastrophic flood. Here we will examine some of these including muck, coal seams, pure limestone, and sedimentary layers.

"Muck is a major geological mystery. It covers one-seventh of the earth's land surface – all surrounding the Arctic Ocean. Muck occupies treeless, generally flat terrain, with no surrounding mountains from which the muck could have eroded. Russian geologists have in some places drilled through 4,000 feet of muck without hitting solid rock. Where did so much eroded material come from?" (Brown, 1996:107). Eroded deposits from a global flood would explain the existence of this muck very nicely.

The mere existence of thick seams of coal calls for a catastrophic explanation. Scientists estimate that about 20 feet of vegetal matter will make 1 foot of coal (Moore, 1940:159). In Australia there are certain coal seams with thicknesses of 266, 277, and 166 feet (Moore, 1940:228). Once you multiple each of these numbers times 20, you begin to appreciate the massive amount of vegetation it took to form these coal seams. A particularly large coal seam is the Pittsburgh bed of the Appalachian region, which is over 2,100 square miles with an average thickness of over 7 feet. The amount of vegetation needed to produce this has been estimated at around 30,000 square miles (Moore, 1940:228). How does conventional geology explain coal formation? They invoke a hypothetical Age of Coal Swamps (Lutgens and Edward, 2006:423) during which large forests would slowly collect dead vegetation at the bottom of swamps. It is important to note that no such coal swamps exist today which could explain such massive coal seams. Also, a salt-water worm called Spirorbis has been found in coal seams, this would never happen in freshwater forest swamps (Hitching, 1982:163). With heat and pressure, coal can form quickly (Moore, 1940:177). When a railway bridge was being built in Germany in 1882, it was reported that wooden piles that were rammed into the ground and compressed from above formed a coal-like substance in the middle chemically equivalent to anthracite (Hitching, 1982:162-163). With all of the volcanic activity and massive water pressure during the flood coal seams would be quite easily explained.

Pure limestone deposits having no impurities require a rapid burial (Brown, 1996:78). How does conventional geology explain layers of limestone that are sometimes hundreds of feet thick? "The standard geological explanation is that those regions were covered by incredibly lime (alkaline) water for millions of years – a toxic condition not found anywhere on the earth today" (Brown, 1996:139). This is a very unusual explanation given that uniformitarianism says, "The present is the key to the past." Perhaps something catastrophic happened in the past which does not happen today, like a global flood?

The greatest example of modern sedimentation is found in river deltas, but these only cover a small fraction of the area of sedimentary layers, which stretch out to hundreds of thousands of square miles (Brown, 1996:139). A global flood provides just the large-scale event required to explain these extensive sedimentary layers.

The geologic column

The geologic column, according to uniformitarian theory, contains a fossilized history of the evolution of "primitive" lifeforms into more "advanced" lifeforms. The lower layers are said to be much older than the layers on top, and there are certain time periods assigned to the individual layers. But the existence of many fossils that are out of place (Woodmorappe, 1980:211) begs the question as to whether this interpretation of the fossil record is valid. A global flood could have formed most of the fossil record quite easily, since a global flood would cause great erosion and burial of organisms in the sediment.

The question could be raised as to why a general trend of "simpler" organisms exists in the lower layers and more "advanced" organisms in the upper layers. This is a valid question, and with a global flood there are many mechanisms which could explain the sorting and layering of sediments and fossils. Some of these mechanisms are pure chance, preservation bias, hydrodynamic sorting, differential escape, and ecological zonation (Woodmorappe, 1983:151-163). For instance, during a flood less mobile organisms, which could appear "primitive", would be buried first, while those that could swim, run, or fly away would be able to escape being buried in the lower layers, but some would eventually get caught in the higher layers. Why would currently existing organisms be more similar to the ones in higher fossil layers? Because the deeper an organism was buried, the less the likelihood that its eggs, larvae, seeds, or spores would survive in a post-flood environment (Woodmorappe, 1983:166). Why are there fewer human fossils in the lowest layers? Aside from the obvious fact that many humans would be very capable at initially escaping the oncoming flood waters where other organisms would get buried, there are several other possible explanations. The human population was probably significantly smaller during the flood, which would make finding human fossil remains more difficult than other organisms, humans probably lived further from sites where sediments were deposited first so they would decompose, and if humans died near rivers they would float to the delta or ocean and then decompose or get eaten by scavengers (Woodmorappe, 1983:167-171). It is not difficult to see that a global flood could very easily explain the fossil record, and it need not have taken millions of years to form the layers.

https://www.esalq.usp.br/lepse/imgs/conteudo_thumb/The-Complexity-of-the-Cell.pdf

The above link is an excellent article regarding issues of complexity. Considering the now known facts regarding the extreme complexity of even one cell, is there anyone who can truly point out a primitive and or simple life form? Since all living things are composed of cells which are extremely complex, what exactly is or was there, that is or was simple?

If no life form can actually be declared or proved to be simple, then what legitimacy does the theory of evolution concerning the development of life from simple to complex really have?

Good article explaining the origins of life on Earth. 

https://news.uchicago.edu/explainer/origin-life-earth-explained

Quote from: Alan on Wed Dec 04, 2024 - 07:29:57Good article explaining the origins of life on Earth.

https://news.uchicago.edu/explainer/origin-life-earth-explained

Yes, a good short and sweet article for those of the Evolutionary faith. None of its speculations regarding the origins of life on earth having been proved to date. All theory, believed by many by faith alone. Just like YEC's, and every other theory that attempts to explain the origins of life here on earth, or anywhere else for that matter.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lijlf2roFms

Geological Myopia
 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zupRpA0bZnw

Niagara Falls erosion.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZfmUn1oO_5w

Fossils in a day.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UrCpTBsgxhk

3 signs that the solar system is young.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oDv18_p9bIU

How Did Earth Change AFTER Noah's Flood? Beyond Is Genesis History

We scientifically and factually observe that catastrophism rapidly forms canyons and sedimentary layers. We do not scientifically or factually observe that slow deep time processes of river or creek flow create canyons many times the size of rivers or creeks themselves. To the contrary, we do observe that rivers and creeks today including in the Grand Canyon, are not carving anything. They are being filled with rocks and debris from erosion, not carving out deeper and deeper canyons. Accepting when unusual flooding or mud flow conditions are added to the scenario.