Was Most Terrestrial Life Destroyed by a Global Flood ~4500 Years Ago?

Alfonso Bivouac · 02-22-2016, 04:35 PM

:

Why isn't this in Theology?

It's not about theology. It's about LIFE. As in ... LIFE being destroyed by a Flood. Expected distribution of CORPSES (former LIVES) if there were indeed a Global Flood. Etc.

Maybe you should talk to the Mods about renaming this forum ... "Life Science BS Which Appears to Support the Darwinian Fairy Tale"

Then you could legitimately exclude my stuff.

So what distribution of corpses would you expect if there had indeed been a Global Flood that took place over a space of mere months about 4,000 years ago, Dave?

Please tell us.

In the dim and distant past Davey claimed they were sorted by how fast they could run as the flood came at them. The slow ones were lower down. It led to the interesting point that some trees must have been sprinters.

Alfonso Bivouac · 02-24-2016, 07:47 PM

:

[...]
The point, you mouthbreathing fuckwit, is that even though different cultures have some vaguely similar-sounding flood myths, the people are too genetically, linguistically, and culturally different, and they're too geographically spread out and have been spread out for far too long, to have all descended from Noah and his family. And the fact that some widely dispersed cultures have vaguely similar-sounding flood myths is not sufficient evidence to override the fact that there's no fucking way they all descended from the same family 4,500 years ago.
[...]

You forget he believes the Tower of Babel myth describes and actual event and explains linquistic and cultural differences between people... All they had to do was disperse a few thousand Km, and voila!

Never mind that between the end of the flood and the Tower of Babel we have 300+ years of Ice Age ... to account for the Ice Ages on earth.

I've heard Dave handwave the Tower of Babel incident as somewhere between 300 and 500 years AFTER the flood. That puts language dispersal and planet colonization around 4,000 ybp; which is even WORSE for Dave's story.

I think in the Pyramid Inch discussions Dave was using Rohl's work as an example of why the dates were wrong and then invoking Piazza Smith or someone to shorten the Pyramid dates to 2,100 ybp to give "time" for the Flood (4,500 ybp), the ice age leading to the Tower of Babel (4,200 ybp), global colonization out of the Tower and full establishment of all earthly civilizations (100 years), 5th Dynasty Egypt builds the Pyramids of Giza (2,100 ybp).

Just SO much tard in such a small package. And to think we spent 5 or 10 parts of the discussion about the surveyor work to disprove Dave's Pyramid Inch.

Back at IIDB, he initially forgot about the Tower of Babel entirely. He was so wrapped up in generating ex-recto population growth statistics to allow him enough Egyptians to build pyramids that he didn't think of anything else.

After he had painted himself into a corner by stating his preferred population dynamics, it occurred to me one morning that he had overlooked a far earlier, and even bigger, post-Fludde building project. Much ROFL'ing ensued.

Dave's only defence was to attempt to argue that, really, the Tower of Babel was quite tiddly, and didn't need many people at all.

Maybe the tower was built with straw bales and a flammable straw floor?

That would only take very little labour and almost no inputs. The rabbits and goats probably helped with the work.

A few potted plants outside to attract the rain. It's all good in Davie world.

Barbarian · 02-22-2016, 06:41 AM

:

Sithrak will make your punishment especially unpleasant.

The canon is clear: nothing you do can make your fate any worse. So technically you are spreading heresy, although it won't make your fate any worse.

BenTheBiased · 02-22-2016, 06:05 PM

:

Not quite sure why Dave is knocking books.

All lies, except for YEC books.

"If those books are in agreement with Answers in Genesis, we have no need of them; and if these are opposed to Answers in Genesis, destroy them."

Although, with Dave it's more like "If those books have nuggets that can be remotely interpreted as agreement with Answers in Genesis, we skim for them; and if these have no nuggets that can remotely be interpreted as agreement with Answers in Genesis, ignore or insult them."

BenTheBiased · 02-24-2016, 08:11 PM

:

So why did God get in a snit about Babel, if it was so tiddly, and allow the Egyptians the pyramids?

One might also well ask... Why did God get in a snit about Babel considering, as we now know, Heaven is not in the sky?

(To which the supposed biblical "literalist" will answer that we are misinterpreting the story when we read exactly what it plainly says.)

borealis · 02-22-2016, 02:07 PM

I'm sticking with Sedna and the Supernatural Beaver.

The nerve of any Christian whining about people wearing fancy robes and hats.

borealis · 04-02-2016, 06:33 PM

No one really knows.

buttershug · 02-21-2016, 05:37 PM

:

Let me remind you…

We have billions of dead things buried in rock layers laid down by water all over the earth… not to mention that we have hundreds of traditions from cultures all over the world telling about a global flood.

And ... No currently operating processes could possibly be extrapolated over millions or billions of years to produce anything remotely similar to what we see in the geological record no matter what type of pretzel logic or intellectual gymnastics are employed.

" no evidence to ignore"

Lol

LOL indeed.

What, exactly, in your "billions of dead things buried in rock layers laid down by water all over the earth" mantra, cannot be produced over "currently operating processes"?

Remember: We can readily provide a whole LIST of features that your Flood could not possibly have produced. You know them all of course, but it's trivial to post some of them again.

Can you provide us with ONE feature an old Earth cannot account for? And your Fludde theory can?

Inb4 "Yeah well, Flood legends"!!!

He put in the unnecessary and invalid stipulation of "currently operating processes".

buttershug · 02-22-2016, 01:52 PM

:

Many cultures had legends about the origin of the sun and moon, the reasons for thunder, and so on and so on.

They were wrong too.

Yeah like our culture for example… Where there was once a piece of nothing we call a singularity and it exploded and created all things. Complete with "dark energy" and "dark matter."

Lol

Only those are not folklore and legends.

I see. And how do you know?

First you have to understand the difference between (1) legend and folklore and (2) scientific theory.

The difference appears to be (1) no fancy robes (2) fancy robes

(and hat)

No Dave, the difference is starting with a conclusion that will never be given up and starting with evidence and changing conclusions as new evidence is found.

buttershug · 02-22-2016, 01:55 PM

:

Secondly ...

:

And the fact that many cultures all over the earth have flood myths is evidence AGAINST the biblical version of a flood! In the biblical version, all those cultures were wiped out, you fuckwit. They wouldn't have survived to talk about it if it had actually happened! How do you not grasp this?

This has long struck me as one of the stupidest arguments In favor of the flood. "Many cultures all around the world speak of a global flood... that killed everyone off." You seriously can't see the problem here?

Bwahahahaha!!

Hold on. Let's examine your logic ... you say that "flood legends from all over the world is evidence AGAINST the Flood"?

Surely you do understand that IF there was indeed a Global Flood which wiped out all human life except for those on the ark ... and IF the ark family did indeed repopulate the earth ... then flood legends all over the earth is exactly what we would expect ... right?

You DO get this part, don't you?

So much crap in this thread already ... did anyone answer this yet?

You would expect reasonably consistent legends.
And much more detailed legends.

You have faith that the legends that exist are consistent with your beliefs.
You have never looked into the details of those legends.

And of course you do not understand that until your "evidence" is accepted, it is not accepted.
You keep trying to use it, but it's like a bad check, it hasn't cleared yet.

buttershug · 02-22-2016, 02:00 PM

:

Many cultures had legends about the origin of the sun and moon, the reasons for thunder, and so on and so on.

They were wrong too.

Yeah like our culture for example… Where there was once a piece of nothing we call a singularity and it exploded and created all things. Complete with "dark energy" and "dark matter."

Lol

Only those are not folklore and legends.

I see. And how do you know?

Voxrat listens to people who provide detail.
You never do.
You don't know any real details about the legends.

buttershug · 02-22-2016, 02:01 PM

:

Hawkins has gone straight to the buffoonery phase, so there's no chance of getting him to even acknowledge the question:

If all the flood folklore derives from the stories of a single family on a single boat...

How would they ever have been able to know the extent of the flood?

Did they have satellite images from the opposite side of the earth?

That's easy.
God told Noah, and God doesn't lie about stuff like that.

buttershug · 02-22-2016, 04:38 PM

:

Secondly ...

:

And the fact that many cultures all over the earth have flood myths is evidence AGAINST the biblical version of a flood! In the biblical version, all those cultures were wiped out, you fuckwit. They wouldn't have survived to talk about it if it had actually happened! How do you not grasp this?

This has long struck me as one of the stupidest arguments In favor of the flood. "Many cultures all around the world speak of a global flood... that killed everyone off." You seriously can't see the problem here?

Bwahahahaha!!

Hold on. Let's examine your logic ... you say that "flood legends from all over the world is evidence AGAINST the Flood"?

Surely you do understand that IF there was indeed a Global Flood which wiped out all human life except for those on the ark ... and IF the ark family did indeed repopulate the earth ... then flood legends all over the earth is exactly what we would expect ... right?

You DO get this part, don't you?

If you showed up at a day care to pick up your kid, you would expect the day car to give you a kid, right?

But don't you think you would insist on the right kid?

There would be a set of flood legends if The Flood was real.
There are a set of flood legends.
But they are not the set you would expect.
Not every possible set of flood legends would give support to The Flood being real.
And the set that exists does not give such support.

You lose every time. And you must know it.

buttershug · 02-22-2016, 04:55 PM

:

If you showed up at a day care to pick up your kid, you would expect the day car to give you a kid, right?

But don't you think you would insist on the right kid?

Not necessarily. If your kid was enough of a PITA on a consistent basis, you might be glad to just get any replacement.

True enough, and I think Dave will never understand that he has such extremely low standards for anything he thinks supports his beliefs.

And impossibly high standards for anything that contradicts them.

buttershug · 02-22-2016, 06:57 PM

:

If you showed up at a day care to pick up your kid, you would expect the day car to give you a kid, right?

But don't you think you would insist on the right kid?

Not necessarily. If your kid was enough of a PITA on a consistent basis, you might be glad to just get any replacement.

True enough, and I think Dave will never understand that he has such extremely low standards for anything he thinks supports his beliefs.

And impossibly high standards for anything that contradicts them.

There does seem to be a certain...

asymmetry

there.

I have a theory about the psychodynamics behind that, if anyone is interested.

My thoughts are that it involves some form of aversion to uncertainty.
If something increases uncertainty then it is rejected, and if it decreases uncertainty it is accepted.

I mean if he is wrong about the Flood then what else could he be wrong about.
He would not know for certain.

buttershug · 02-22-2016, 11:35 PM

:

I'm not sure, butters. I'm pretty sure he's clinging on like dear life to the slim possibility that he's not CERTAINLY wrong.

He doesn't even bother to defend YEC these days - just insists that it's less ludicrous than the alternative. And goes to huge lengths to avoid understanding case. Better to travel hopefully than to discover you are dead wrong.

I've seen people get agitated when something was uncertain.
I can't remember any examples off hand but I have seen people prefer something that definitely will be bad rather than something that might be good.

Having a choice between a small raise or possibly a big bonus is close.

But I mean suppose 1 is bad and 10 is great.
Some people would choose 4 rather than 4 to 8.

And please don't anybody tell me that that would be irrational.
I am talking about people.

buttershug · 02-22-2016, 11:36 PM

:

If you showed up at a day care to pick up your kid, you would expect the day car to give you a kid, right?

But don't you think you would insist on the right kid?

Not necessarily. If your kid was enough of a PITA on a consistent basis, you might be glad to just get any replacement.

True enough, and I think Dave will never understand that he has such extremely low standards for anything he thinks supports his beliefs.

And impossibly high standards for anything that contradicts them.

There does seem to be a certain...

asymmetry

there.

I have a theory about the psychodynamics behind that, if anyone is interested.

My thoughts are that it involves some form of aversion to uncertainty.
If something increases uncertainty then it is rejected, and if it decreases uncertainty it is accepted.

I mean if he is wrong about the Flood then what else could he be wrong about.
He would not know for certain.

Similar to my theory.

I must have a get out of hell free card
If I do everything right I will get one
But if I interpret the Bible I might interpret it wrong and do something wrong
See initial premise
Therefore my reading of the Bible is inerrant, as is the Bible itself

Not true of every YEC, of course.

You are using logic.
We are talking about people not Vulcans.

buttershug · 02-23-2016, 01:58 PM

Is it true that "Cleopatra lived closer to the building of Pizza Hut than the pyramids"?

buttershug · 02-23-2016, 04:46 PM

:

But I mean suppose 1 is bad and 10 is great.
Some people would choose 4 rather than 4 to 8.

That's totally irrational. I mean, who would do that???

It's never presented in that way.
But I would say about half the population.

Just say "profit sharing" to some people to see what I mean.
You will get answers regarding about not knowing how much to budget for things if you do not know how much money you are going to get.

buttershug · 02-24-2016, 12:37 AM

:

Did Dave seriously say that if a single family living 4,500 years ago were the only survivors of a global flood, and they were the ancestors of everyone who came after, the situation we see today would be "exactly what we'd expect to see"?

A global population of 7 billion people of many, many races, languages, and cultures living on every habitable piece of land on the whole planet is "exactly what you'd expect to see".

Not a much smaller population of genetically, linguistically, and culturally closely related people living somewhat near wherever the boat landed?

Fucking retarded.

When did the story of The Tower of Babylon take place?
Doesn't Bible say everyone spoke the language before that?

buttershug · 02-24-2016, 04:42 PM

:

Butters:

:

When did the story of The Tower of Babylon take place?
Doesn't Bible say everyone spoke the language before that?

Bab-El, wasn't it? Named for one of Superman's relatives?

Or am I getting my fictions cross-wired?

I was tired and about to go to bed and had some reading to do and I've been busy

Oh sorry, didn't mean to babble on.