Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
you guys really believe that a man and his eight sons built a boat that held all the different species of animals, insects and either all the salt water fish or fresh water fish and enough food to last a year? That my friend is bat crap crazy story to take literally.
I read on some archaeology site that there is more than one of these outcroppings in this particular region.
I bet that "outcropping" you speak of didn't have anchor stones with it or have a history of people down the ages visiting that place and taking parts of the boat away for good luck charms.
Don't you wish. fact is i was busy elsewhere and I'd got tired of of refuting your less that erudite arguments.
The T rex stuff was a fossil and millions of years old just as much as other fossils. That dissolving the hard mineral with acid and recovering material that was more pliable in itself does not make it T Rex steak. Since it was hard fossil soft tissue in the beginning, that can be fiddled together with it to falsely imply that it is fresh meat that cannot be millions of years old.
The remark about frozen mammoths is even more ignorant or dishonest. They are relict of the last Ice age and not claimed to be millions of years old - as is the case with the oldest of the Ice cored, as dated by radiometric dating of the trapped gases.
But even if they were - there is no reason why a 60 million year old ice level (they are simply not that old (1) could not contain preserved dinosaurs. If the air and bacteria are excluded and they freezing is hard enough to prevent all bacterial activity, there in no reason why a T rex shouldn't survive in an organic state. Thus fossil material, containing substances that when the hard mineral is dissolved away can become pliable, is a surprise, but not the refutation of eep time that you would dearly love it to be.
And before you trot out Frozen mammoths prove the flood, kindly note that this is one of the arguments that AIG says Creationists should not use.
Crickets? I can hear them..."denial..denial..denial..."
(1) neither are the tar -pits. Though they are old enough to preserve (I believe organic) material of creatures tens of thousand of years old - I only wish that a tar pit or indeed Glacier tens of million of years old would be possible as it could well contained preserved dinosaurs with organic (if not edible) tissue, and it would still not be the slightest help for you Young Earth Genesis -literalism
I bet that "outcropping" you speak of didn't have anchor stones with it or have a history of people down the ages visiting that place and taking parts of the boat away for good luck charms.
The fact is my ignorant old mate, that the 'anchor stones' are al over the area and not associated with that particular outcrop of rock. Nor are the various tales of people visit Ark remains on Ararat. Both or either could be related to any part of the mountain, whether the lower part with rocks and dirt as in the wrongly -shaped Wyatt site or above the snowline as in the dodgy - looking NAMI ark claim.
P.s
It is very worthwhile and interesting to read about these 'Frozen mammoths'.
Claim CC361.2:
The bodies of mammoths that apparently froze suddenly have been found. Their flesh was well preserved, and they still had food in their mouths. This shows that they were quick-frozen in some sort of catastrophe. Source:
Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, 1985. Life--How Did It Get Here? Brooklyn, NY, p. 203.
Response:
The reports of frozen mammoths with well-preserved flesh are greatly exaggerated. Parts of cadavers have been well preserved, but in all cases, the internal organs were rotted, or the body was partly eaten by scavengers, or both, before the animal became frozen. The Berezovka mammoth, perhaps the most famous example, showed evidence of very slow decay and was putrefied to the point that the excavators found its stench unbearable (Weber 1980). The best preserved mammoth, Dima, was an infant; its small size and starved condition permitted quicker freezing, and even it had a little decomposition (Guthrie 1990, 7).
There are probably several different causes of the deaths of frozen mammoths and other animals, including the following:
Sinking in muddy silt (Guthrie 1990, 7-24).
Drowning/burial in flash floods carrying a heavy load of silt.
Predation, followed by winter freezing, followed by burial in silt carried by snowmelt (Guthrie 1990, 81-113).
Fall in a landslide, as a thawed riverbank gives way under the animal's weight. The landslide and subsequent soil creep can bury and preserve the animal (Kurtén 1986, chap. 9).
The food found with the mammoths were arctic species. Some mammoth deaths would have been sudden, but there is no evidence of sudden climate change.
Frozen mammoths are not common. As of 1961, only thirty-nine have been found with some flesh preserved, and only four of those were more or less intact (Farrand 1961). http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CC/CC361_2.html
Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 02-23-2014 at 05:40 AM..
If they can give good reasons why even the one described in Genesis - which God had to tell him how to build - and he hardly had time to build any others before the rains came - is not feasible, surely the others are equally unfeasible.
Those two facts - that Genesis says only one and there is hardly room for others should be all the proof any reasonable person would require.
Oh damn! I didn't notice the sig and I took you seriously. Truly sorry, but it is sometimes hard to write a post that is so absurd that one can't take it for serious.
Fact #1 Jesus Christ testified to the validity of Noah & the flood.
Fact #2 Other people wrote about this same event.
The only "barrier" to the truth is the assumption that you already have it.
1) What - where is this Jesus Flood testimony? Copy/Paste it here word for word and mention the bible version/translation you used.
2) What other people wrote about the worldwide flood and where?
3) In any case, assuming you actually can deliver the evidence you say is out there (and it's not massively open to interpretation), then let's engage in intelligent conjecture by answering the following question: If the flood was worldwide and involved the saving of every species of animal, then how many species were there at the time? What year was the flood according to evidence, and can we project how many animals must have been on said boat? Now, as someone who knows a little about care of large animals... let's figure out how much space was needed to just house/feed/take care of them: 2 Elephants, 2 Rhinos, 2 lions, 2 Giraffes, etc...
LOL - this is the amusing part... there's no way thousands of land and air animals with all the necessary supplies and crew to take care of them were put on a boat able to contain them all for 3 months - simply no way. The bible says: The Ark measured 300x50x30 cubits (Genesis 6:15), which is about 140x23x13.5 metres or 459x75x44 feet, so its volume was 43,500 m3 (cubic metres) or 1.54 million cubic feet. To put this in perspective, this is the equivalent volume of 522 standard American railroad stock cars, each of which can hold 240 sheep for just 1 day.
If you have any zoological knowledge you know that once you throw in just a few of the very large animals, well then all rationality gets thrown to the wind... the space, food, and fecal matter issue produced is well beyond the ark capacity mentioned (and the capacity of a small crew to maintain).
If Jesus really said the Ark was real (which I'm not convinced he did), perhaps he was "wrong" and reiterating a myth passed down through written and oral history for untold eons as let's be realistic now, how many people back in Jesus's time had any notion about 1) how many animals really existed on the entire earth, 2) when the Ark story actually took place, and 3) how large of a boat and how much food would be needed via mathematical calculations to feed and keep clean all the eating/defecating animals.
Here's the reality, barring anyone producing currently unfathomable evidence to the contrary (I'm open-minded, just skeptical, as I believe the story of the Ark even 2000 years ago was just a myth/story retold over and over again to teach about preparedness and I would even say about the rewards of having faith un a greater benevolent being/creator.
Now if you want to believe that somehow space & time were manipulated by God, and perhaps the aggressive carnivorous animals on the boat mysteriously slept and didn't hunt or need to eat, and that perhaps all the animals in general were lulled to sleep/hibernation and fasted via supernatural influence - along with Noah hearing God supernaturally, along with all the animals being guided supernaturally to the Ark without killing each other - ..... then..... then... wait for it... why didn't God just instantly smite the heck out of everything bad with his supernatural power, rather than do things in such an obtuse way?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
fact is i was busy elsewhere and I'd got tired of of refuting your less that erudite arguments.
that the 'anchor stones' are al over the area and not associated with that particular outcrop of rock. Nor are the various tales of people visit Ark remains on Ararat. Both or either could be related to any part of the mountain, whether the lower part with rocks and dirt as in the wrongly -shaped Wyatt site or above the snowline as in the dodgy - looking NAMI ark claim.
Hey Now!! There's the geological proof we were all looking for! 
