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.
There is overwhelming evidence that the earth has experienced many ice ages over millions of years and that the last one peaked about twenty thousand years ago. Because the Bible was only written in the last two thousand years there is no mention or explanation of great sheets of ice that covered vast expanses of the earth. The Bible also paints a picture of man being created as a modern man who just happened to know about agriculture and farming, spoke languages and presumably could write as well. Why is it that there's no written literature in the Bible or elsewhere that describes this drastic change in climate? I would think that ice sheets that were as thick as 3,000 meters would catch someone's attention and maybe they'd want to write down a description of this phenomenon. The geological evidence for ice ages is extensive and we're also aware of ice age mammals such as the wooly mammoth that were hunted by man during that time period. So how exactly does a person who believes in a 6,000 year old earth fit ice ages into this very short timeframe or do you think that ice ages are just something that scientists are confused about or making up so that they can persuade people to believe that the earth is actually very old?
I think they have nothing to counter the Ice Age issue with, so they will look for false data, or question carbon dating.
I have always been amazed that man has advanced this far in only 60,000 to 65,000 years. When you see where we started and how fare we have come it could give you a big head as a species. If we can do this much in 60,000 years, what will we accomplish in the next million years? I wish I could hang around and see it.
Recently, a very exciting find has come to light - a mud pool - over 30ft deep, within it's depths are fossils so intact and colourful that show the earth cannot be as old as previously thourght. The mud pool is in England and show that the earth being flooded at the time of Noah - 4,500 years ago - would fit in more with the standard of the fossils found.
Recently, a very exciting find has come to light - a mud pool - over 30ft deep, within it's depths are fossils so intact and colourful that show the earth cannot be as old as previously thourght. The mud pool is in England and show that the earth being flooded at the time of Noah - 4,500 years ago - would fit in more with the standard of the fossils found.
The Bible doesn't specifically mention anything about an ice age. It didn't really affect the writers of the Bible, given that their location in the Middle East is far south of the continental glaciations.
Creationists are usually pretty excited about evidence of an ice age though, because evolution's time frames are so far off from the truth.
Creationists site the Ice Age as an effect of the Noachian flood. Secular scientists on the other hand have difficulty explaining how the Ice Age began.
As Dr. Walt Brown points out,
Quote:
“An ice age implies extreme snowfall which, in turn, requires cold temperatures and heavy precipitation. Heavy precipitation can occur only if oceans are warm enough to produce equally heavy evaporation. How could warm oceans exist with cold atmospheric temperatures? Another problem is stopping an ice age once it begins—or beginning a new ice age after one ends. As glaciers expand, they reflect more of the Sun’s radiation away from earth, lowering temperatures and causing glaciers to grow even more. Eventually the entire globe should freeze. Conversely, if glaciers shrink, as they have in recent decades, the earth should reflect less heat into space, warm up, and melt all glaciers forever.†(Walt Brown, In the Beginning, 2001, p 92)
Dr. Walt Brown explains how the Ice Age serves as evidence for the flood in his In the Beginning, available to read online at - The Center for Scientific Creation.
Go to this site to see how Dr. Brown believes the flood explains the Ice Age, visit - http://www.creationscience.com/HydroplateOverview.html (broken link).
For a little more information on the creation perspective, with slightly different views than Dr. Brown's, you'll find more information here: Get Answers: Ice Age
The Bible doesn't specifically mention anything about an ice age. It didn't really affect the writers of the Bible, given that their location in the Middle East is far south of the continental glaciations.
Creationists are usually pretty excited about evidence of an ice age though, because evolution's time frames are so far off from the truth.
Creationists site the Ice Age as an effect of the Noachian flood. Secular scientists on the other hand have difficulty explaining how the Ice Age began.
As Dr. Walt Brown points out,
Dr. Walt Brown explains how the Ice Age serves as evidence for the flood in his In the Beginning, available to read online at - The Center for Scientific Creation.
Go to this site to see how Dr. Brown believes the flood explains the Ice Age, visit - http://www.creationscience.com/HydroplateOverview.html (broken link).
For a little more information on the creation perspective, with slightly different views than Dr. Brown's, you'll find more information here: Get Answers: Ice Age
Wow.... This has got to be one of the worst cases of scientific assertion I have ever seen... Ice Ages mean snowfall? That's pretty pathetic even for a Creationist.
Could you actually point to a "secular web site" as this pseudo-scientist claims that states the Ice Ages imply a period of extreme snowfall? It would be much appreciated. Because all of this time I've read from secular science that Ice Ages are when ice sheets cover the Northern and Southern Hemispheres (technically we're still in an Ice Age by those standards- and look it's close to 100 degrees outside at my house). But, to be more definitive and to talk about extreme ice ages we are also talking about ice sheets that cover the North American and Eurasian continents.
So, I'll patiently await your return with the link that states from "secular science" that Ice Ages are merely periods of large snowfall. That was good, I have to admit... I guess this winter if I head up to Minneapolis I can look at everyone and say "Look! It's the beginning of a new Ice Age!!"
Secular scientists on the other hand have difficulty explaining how the Ice Age began.
First of all there isn't just one ice age, there are a great many of them spanning millions of years. There are a number of theories that have been proposed to explain them including a variation in the in the wobble of the earth on it's axis, changes in solar radiation and the effect of continental drift as more land masses move into colder regions where ice sheets can develop. I don't think any one theory answers the question from everything I've read over the years, it could be a variety of things and be much more complex than anyone realizes. One thing is clear though, a six thousand year timeframe is a blink of an eye in geological timescales and it's not possible to squeeze all of the geological and climate changes that we know have occurred into it.
(technically we're still in an Ice Age by those standards)
I don't think so.
During the early Middle Ages, Europe was warm enough that folks could grow grapes in northern England. Then the so-called "Little Ice Age" hit in the late 1200s and lasted until around the middle of the 1800s. One of the benefits of this was that northern Europeans stopped drinking so much wine and began massive beer production. Thank you, Little Ice Age!
We're now in a warming period again.
After temperatures so far this spring, and looking at this week's forecast, personally I'm ready for the next Ice Age. Bring it on!
Wow.... This has got to be one of the worst cases of scientific assertion I have ever seen... Ice Ages mean snowfall? That's pretty pathetic even for a Creationist.
Could you actually point to a "secular web site" as this pseudo-scientist claims that states the Ice Ages imply a period of extreme snowfall? It would be much appreciated. Because all of this time I've read from secular science that Ice Ages are when ice sheets cover the Northern and Southern Hemispheres (technically we're still in an Ice Age by those standards- and look it's close to 100 degrees outside at my house). But, to be more definitive and to talk about extreme ice ages we are also talking about ice sheets that cover the North American and Eurasian continents.
So, I'll patiently await your return with the link that states from "secular science" that Ice Ages are merely periods of large snowfall. That was good, I have to admit... I guess this winter if I head up to Minneapolis I can look at everyone and say "Look! It's the beginning of a new Ice Age!!"
Wow, do you enjoy adding meanings to what isn't there? He didn't say the ice age meant "merely periods of large snowfall." That was your adding to what he said. If you don't think there was snow during the ice age, then you're the one that's deluded.
I don't claim to be an expert on the topic. Frankly, it's inconsequential to me because it's not a salvation matter to me. If you want answers to these types of questions, you're better off Googling because you won't find any scientists on this forum to answer your questions. We can give you information available to everyone on the web. If you have a problem with the information, take it up with them, not me. I responded politely to your question.
Thanks for being unkind enough to ridicule the answer. How ungrateful and rude is that? You're no scientist either and all you can do is regurgitate information that YOU'VE been given and accepted for truth, just as Christians have. You aren't declaring your own personal findings at all. You're parroting what you've read and decided to believe. That's no different from a Christian who reads the Bible and believes that instead of a faulty science book.
You keep screaming SCIENCE, as if it's infallible and accept anything it says. Then you demand scientific responses from Christians. That's like me demanding a Biblical answer from YOU for your belief in evolution. Not that science and faith are incompatible because we BOTH have faith in our beliefs.
I frankly don't care what you believe. I'm not here to convert anyone. As I said, I responded politely to your question. Would responding respectfully back have been that difficult? It doesn't give a Christian any incentive for responding to you in the future does it?
Man I've been hanging out to my Ice core caps evidence for an old earth for a while now. Its always a link followed by a different subject from then on
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.
