Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Kevbo · 05-10-2003, 08:52 PM

Someone on the TheologyWeb forum put up a link to this paper that I have not seen before. The address is:

http://www.bibleonly.org/gen/JATSFlood.PDF

gallo · 05-10-2003, 09:11 PM

A fundy christian M.D. who is webmaster of the "Bible Only" site, and a physicist/engineer. Yep! That's where I want to learn my geology.

Jesus Tap-Dancin' Christ · 05-10-2003, 09:46 PM

Quote:

...we do not believe the biblical account of the flood is true because we can prove it scientifically. Rather, we believe the biblical account because it is God's word.

It's on page five of the PDF.

That ALONE destroys their argument.

Oh, and that they give no evidence and use some good old misquotations here and there.

You DON'T need someone to deal with this scientifically--they already have. When they said that there is no need to account for feeding of the animals because of DIVINE FOOD MULTIPLICATION, they destroyed any need to do so.
It's just a model--and a poor one at that.

Arikay · 05-10-2003, 09:53 PM

Im neither of what you asked for, but it lost me when it said that "then a miracle happend" was acceptable in science. That somehow noah fit all the animals on the ark, and they are survived. How? "goddidit" or "it was a miracle" and then decided to say that we dont need to know why or how.

Just accept that it did happen.

Trying to turn science into faith, isnt the best idea to get science to listen to you.

Then they talk about how the mountains were much lower then. Unfortunatly this doesnt fit with the evidence in the world. It also causes problems since it means that at one point in the last 4400 (if they are going with Usshers dates) the mountains needed to rise to their present height. Releasing massive amounts of energy to do that. There is also no evidence of this massive growing trend that would be needed.

I havent read all the way through it, but so far its not looking like it actually fits with real world evidence.

SULPHUR · 05-11-2003, 02:14 AM

After six pages I lost count of the assumptions.No mountains except mt zion, how did they land on mt ararat which must have been made of of unconsolidated sediment in an area which has a very complicated geology
The mist must have been rather strange as with the so called dew points
Put together by some one with saying very little with agreat number of words

ps418 · 05-11-2003, 08:51 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Kevbo
Someone on the TheologyWeb forum put up a link to this paper that I have not seen before. The address is:

http://www.bibleonly.org/gen/JATSFlood.PDF

That's claptrap even by the standards of many flood geologists. It invokes an earth axial shift as a proximate mechanism. I'll read a bit more of it on monday.

Patrick

Dr.GH · 05-11-2003, 12:22 PM

I am afraid that my eyes rolled back about page 10. I did notice that there were a few mentions of C14 and archaeology later. I will give it another try in a day or so. Too bad I cant spread this on the lawn, I wouldn't need manure for a year or two.

05-10-2003, 08:52 PM	#1
Kevbo Regular Member Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: NY Posts: 212	Would any geologists/geophysicists like to comment on this Biblical flood model? Someone on the TheologyWeb forum put up a link to this paper that I have not seen before. The address is: http://www.bibleonly.org/gen/JATSFlood.PDF

05-11-2003, 02:14 AM	#5
SULPHUR Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: hobart,tasmania Posts: 551	six pages After six pages I lost count of the assumptions.No mountains except mt zion, how did they land on mt ararat which must have been made of of unconsolidated sediment in an area which has a very complicated geology The mist must have been rather strange as with the so called dew points Put together by some one with saying very little with agreat number of words

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

05-10-2003, 09:11 PM	#2
gallo Regular Member Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: Houston, TX, US Posts: 244	A fundy christian M.D. who is webmaster of the "Bible Only" site, and a physicist/engineer. Yep! That's where I want to learn my geology.

05-10-2003, 09:53 PM	#4
Arikay Regular Member Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Ca, Usa Posts: 262	Im neither of what you asked for, but it lost me when it said that "then a miracle happend" was acceptable in science. That somehow noah fit all the animals on the ark, and they are survived. How? "goddidit" or "it was a miracle" and then decided to say that we dont need to know why or how. Just accept that it did happen. Trying to turn science into faith, isnt the best idea to get science to listen to you. Then they talk about how the mountains were much lower then. Unfortunatly this doesnt fit with the evidence in the world. It also causes problems since it means that at one point in the last 4400 (if they are going with Usshers dates) the mountains needed to rise to their present height. Releasing massive amounts of energy to do that. There is also no evidence of this massive growing trend that would be needed. I havent read all the way through it, but so far its not looking like it actually fits with real world evidence.

05-11-2003, 12:22 PM	#7
Dr.GH Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Dana Point, Ca, USA Posts: 2,115	I am afraid that my eyes rolled back about page 10. I did notice that there were a few mentions of C14 and archaeology later. I will give it another try in a day or so. Too bad I cant spread this on the lawn, I wouldn't need manure for a year or two.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.