Noah's Flood And "mental Gymanstics" - Local Flooders Wanted!

[Zakuska]

Yes, quite obsurd.

I am not invested in any interpretation. And yes, floating on ice for 4 months and surviving is ABSURD.

 

Nice to know that Polar bears, penguins and seals way of life is "absurd" and they should all be dead.

 

Have I ever once said that Siberian Tigers floated on ice for 4 months?

 

Surviving on floating debris or ice for 4 months isn't absurd in the least. Stretching ones survival skills to the brink of death... I'll give you that.

Edited June 12, 2014 by Zakuska

[Calm]

No... change it to 4 months."

4 months x 30 days equals 120 days more or less. 5 months=150 days more or less.

[Zakuska]

4 months x 30 days equals 120 days more or less. 5 months=150 days more or less.

Correct you are Cal.

 

So is it plausible for some one to survive for 5 months floating around on the water on ice or debris, eating the occasional dead carcass that floats by. Possibly some curious fish that comes near? or is it Absurd?

 

Sounds like a peace of Pi to me.

Edited June 12, 2014 by Zakuska

[The Nehor]

Nice to know that Polar bears, penguins and seals way of life is "absurd" and they should all be dead.

 

Have I ever once said that Siberian Tigers floated on ice for 4 months?

 

Surviving on floating debris or ice for 4 months isn't absurd in the least. Stretching ones survival skills to the brink of death... I'll give you that.

Because most life is able to live on ice like your hand-picked sample.

No, you never said that outright. You just implied it and danced around it so you can now wring your hands and exclaim indignantly that you never actually said that. A neat rhetorical trick and a cute form of deception. I point out that your ideas are crazy. You respond with a crazy explanation. I call it crazy. You run away and hide behind you never specifically said that was your solution; you just did not offer one and were talking out loud about something else. If that is the case you may want to be checked for mental issues. In fact you should probably do that anyways just to be safe.

A human could survive on floating ice for four months with the right gear. An animal could if it was equipped for the cold and to fish off of ice. Other then that......DEAD.

[The Nehor]

Correct you are Cal.

 

So is it plausible for some one to survive for 5 months floating around on the water on ice or debris, eating the occasional dead carcass that floats by. Possibly some curious fish that comes near? or is it Absurd?

 

Sounds like a peace of Pi to me.

Now you are switching the argument to humans? Keep on dancing!

[Zakuska]

Now you are switching the argument to humans? Keep on dancing!

Switching to Humans?  Not in the least. 

 

What is absurd is the claim you made that the Siberian tigers would have had to dawn scuba gear and fast for five months, to have survived.  Meat eaters are the easiest forms of life to sustain in such a catastrophic scenario. 

Edited June 12, 2014 by Zakuska

[Zakuska]

Because most life is able to live on ice like your hand-picked sample.

No, you never said that outright. You just implied it and danced around it so you can now wring your hands and exclaim indignantly that you never actually said that. A neat rhetorical trick and a cute form of deception. I point out that your ideas are crazy. You respond with a crazy explanation. I call it crazy. You run away and hide behind you never specifically said that was your solution; you just did not offer one and were talking out loud about something else. If that is the case you may want to be checked for mental issues. In fact you should probably do that anyways just to be safe.

A human could survive on floating ice for four months with the right gear. An animal could if it was equipped for the cold and to fish off of ice. Other then that......DEAD.

 

Nice ad hominem attack Nehor. What is absurd about surviving 5 months on something that floats and taking what nature gives you. Are you sure your'e not just mad that your Siberian Tiger knee jerk remark has been proven to be an absurd argument and now you are projecting?

 

It seems to me that critics of the flood are the ones doing mental gymnastics and are in denial when they have to resort to such absurd strawmen to score points.

Edited June 12, 2014 by Zakuska

[The Nehor]

Switching to Humans?  Not in the least. 

 

What is absurd is the claim you made that the Siberian tigers would have had to dawn scuba gear and fast for five months, to have survived.  Meat eaters are the easiest forms of life to sustain in such a catastrophic scenario.

Yep, just sit on the ice which is hopefully thin enough that the cat can reach into the water and take bites off of floating carcasses. You should pursue a grant and test this on a number of animals.

Nice ad hominem attack Nehor. What is absurd about surviving 5 months on something that floats and taking what nature gives you. Are you sure your'e not just mad that your Siberian Tiger knee jerk remark has been proven to be an absurd argument and now you are projecting?

 

It seems to me that critics of the flood are the ones doing mental gymnastics and are in denial when they have to resort to such absurd strawmen to score points.

No, an ad hominem is where you attack the person instead of the argument. I attacked the argument and also attacked you. A very important distinction.

I am not a critic of the flood. I personally suspect a local flood. I am a critic of your insane rationalizations about the flood where ducks, horses, cheetahs, penguins, armadillos, and frogs are all floating across the ocean on sheets of ice somehow eating out of the ocean.

[Zakuska]

Yep, just sit on the ice which is hopefully thin enough that the cat can reach into the water and take bites off of floating carcasses. You should pursue a grant and test this on a number of animals.

No, an ad hominem is where you attack the person instead of the argument. I attacked the argument and also attacked you. A very important distinction.

I am not a critic of the flood. I personally suspect a local flood. I am a critic of your insane rationalizations about the flood where ducks, horses, cheetahs, penguins, armadillos, and frogs are all floating across the ocean on sheets of ice somehow eating out of the ocean.

Well for one. ducks and peguins float in water so they don't need debris to survive. Penguins also for the most part are carnivores.   Horses would fall under cattle so ark for them, but horses also can survive in snow at least for a little while. They do find an occasional grassy gnole[sic]. Most amphibians wouldn't need an ark either.  Any meat eater has a ready supply of meat in the form of how many millions of dead meaty life forms who may be floating among debris they encounter. Yes many would probably have sunk to the bottom already. But in a few more days they would have been uncovered again by water recession. The animals that would have had a real tough time with what I suggest are the herbivorous. Which BTW, are taken care of by Noah and the 8.

Edited June 12, 2014 by Zakuska

[JarMan]

 

That's a fascinating theory.  I wonder what the logistics would be for a "local flood" in the Caspian Sea area, and to what degree it could be tested from the existing geologic evidence.  I wonder how the process of building an ark (would it have been built in the sea itself?),  gathering animals (which animals from the basin would need to be preserved), and then having all the people living in the basin drown from a flood incident (without them retreating to higher ground in the surrounding hills).  And then for the water to rise high enough that the ark would settle "in the mountains".  It's an interesting idea and something to think about.

 

Also, other than the local flood theory, can anyone cite an example of God caring about regional biodiversity and extinction events?  It seems odd to theorize God planning a flood to wipe out the wicked humans who live in a specific valley, but then asking Noah to prepare an ark so the local dung-beetle won't get wiped out. After all, Noah didn't have to save all the animals, so God was okay with 99.9999% of the populations getting exterminated.  It wasn't matter of compassion.  It was like there were these isolated species in this one spot and God really didn't want to have to re-evolve them again, or have a few breeding pairs migrate to the next valley over the course of the hundreds of years Noah was building the ark.

 

There is no end to the oddness of the local flood theories.

 

In the interest of full disclosure, I now consider the flood story to be metaphorical, although I used to be in the local flood camp. I changed my mind because the local flood just doesn't make sense, as you have pointed out. In my view, though, the global flood theory has many more problems than a local flood.

[Rob Osborn]

In the interest of full disclosure, I now consider the flood story to be metaphorical, although I used to be in the local flood camp. I changed my mind because the local flood just doesn't make sense, as you have pointed out. In my view, though, the global flood theory has many more problems than a local flood.

How does one make the flood story metaphorical? Thats the same thing as making the Jaredites coming to America in vessels also metaphorical. How does this even work?

[The Nehor]

Well for one. ducks and peguins float in water so they don't need debris to survive. Penguins also for the most part are carnivores.   Horses would fall under cattle so ark for them, but horses also can survive in snow at least for a little while. They do find an occasional grassy gnole[sic]. Most amphibians wouldn't need an ark either.  Any meat eater has a ready supply of meat in the form of how many millions of dead meaty life forms who may be floating among debris they encounter. Yes many would probably have sunk to the bottom already. But in a few more days they would have been uncovered again by water recession. The animals that would have had a real tough time with what I suggest are the herbivorous. Which BTW, are taken care of by Noah and the 8.

 

Most amphibians would not fare well without land other then ice for several months. Assuming they even have fresh water.

 

 

How does one make the flood story metaphorical? Thats the same thing as making the Jaredites coming to America in vessels also metaphorical. How does this even work?

 

I agree with Rob. Someone help!!!! I need to bleach my brain.

[thesometimesaint]

Then you are back to having to pack all the freshwater species on the ark. Easier.....but still pretty much impossible.

 

You've never had fish packed in salt water?

[thesometimesaint]

You said...  "Glacial floods would  not baptize the whole earth"

 

Sure it would. The earth under ice solves everything. How far south did the 2 mile thick sheets of Ice stretch during the last Ice age and how much land peaked out of the ocean in front of the ice? Think of the earth as a rock in a snowball. Its essentially baptized. And besides it wouldn't take much water at all to cover ALL the remaining land as the ice melted and receeded.  And remember... ice floats so we are talking Natural Arks all around the world. (Or did the rains wash all those animals off the ice too?)

 

Theologically non-humans don't need baptism.

 

The vast majority of cold and or wet plants and animals don't do well. In fact they die.

 

Even if the story is believed only those plants and animals not brought onto the boat perished.

Edited June 12, 2014 by thesometimesaint

[thesometimesaint]

How does one make the flood story metaphorical? Thats the same thing as making the Jaredites coming to America in vessels also metaphorical. How does this even work?

 

The Jaredites didn't come to the Americas during Noah's flood.

[thesometimesaint]

An interest idea is that of a Caspian Sea flood

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outburst_flood

[mnn727]

  And remember... ice floats so we are talking Natural Arks all around the world. (Or did the rains wash all those animals off the ice too?)

So animals lasted almost a year floating on blocks of ice? really? that's your claim?

 

Genesis 7: ¹² And the rain was upon the earth forty days and forty nights.

 

Genesis 7: 17 And the flood was forty days upon the earth; and the waters increased, and bare up the ark, and it was lift up above the earth.

 

Genesis 7: ²⁴ And the waters prevailed upon the earth an hundred and fifty days.

 

Genesis 8: 4 And the ark rested in the seventh month, on the seventeenth day of the month, upon the mountains of Ararat.

 

5 And the waters decreased continually until the tenth month: in the tenth month, on the first day of the month, were the tops of the mountains seen.

 

6 And it came to pass at the end of forty days, that Noah opened the window of the ark which he had made:

 

Genesis 8: ⁹ But the dove found no rest for the sole of her foot, and she returned unto him into the ark, for the waterswere on the face of the whole earth: then he put forth his hand, and took her, and pulled her in unto him into the ark.

¹⁰ And he stayed yet other seven days; and again he sent forth the dove out of the ark;

¹¹ And the dove came in to him in the evening; and, lo, in her mouth was an olive leaf pluckt off: so Noah knew that the waters were abated from off the earth.

¹² And he stayed yet other seven days; and sent forth the dove; which returned not again unto him any more.

 

40+40+150+40 + 7 + 7 = 284 days     284/30 = ~9.5 months

Edited June 12, 2014 by mnn727

[bcuzbcuz]

So animals lasted almost a year floating on blocks of ice? really? that's your claim?

 

Genesis 7: ¹² And the rain was upon the earth forty days and forty nights.

 

Genesis 7: 17 And the flood was forty days upon the earth; and the waters increased, and bare up the ark, and it was lift up above the earth.

 

Genesis 7: ²⁴ And the waters prevailed upon the earth an hundred and fifty days.

 

Genesis 8: 4 And the ark rested in the seventh month, on the seventeenth day of the month, upon the mountains of Ararat.

 

5 And the waters decreased continually until the tenth month: in the tenth month, on the first day of the month, were the tops of the mountains seen.

 

6 And it came to pass at the end of forty days, that Noah opened the window of the ark which he had made:

 

Genesis 8: ⁹ But the dove found no rest for the sole of her foot, and she returned unto him into the ark, for the waterswere on the face of the whole earth: then he put forth his hand, and took her, and pulled her in unto him into the ark.

¹⁰ And he stayed yet other seven days; and again he sent forth the dove out of the ark;

¹¹ And the dove came in to him in the evening; and, lo, in her mouth was an olive leaf pluckt off: so Noah knew that the waters were abated from off the earth.

¹² And he stayed yet other seven days; and sent forth the dove; which returned not again unto him any more.

 

40+40+150+40 + 7 + 7 = 284 days     284/30 = ~9.5 months

I've eaten an olive, picked from a four hundred year old olive tree.....nasty, definitely nasty tasting thing.. Olive trees don't get nor need too much water. Any idea as to what would happen to an olive tree buried under water for ~9.5 months? Rot, comes to mind.

[mnn727]

I've eaten an olive, picked from a four hundred year old olive tree.....nasty, definitely nasty tasting thing.. Olive trees don't get nor need too much water. Any idea as to what would happen to an olive tree buried under water for ~9.5 months? Rot, comes to mind.

Yeah, I've said that myself on one of Rob Osborne's many threads on this subject. Texas has a few man made lakes in my area where the tops of dead tree's still stick out of the water. Most tree's can not take too much water for any length of time.

[Rob Osborn]

The Jaredites didn't come to the Americas during Noah's flood.

No, my point was that just because its a story from scripture doesnt make it automatically metaphorical.

[Zakuska]

 

So animals lasted almost a year floating on blocks of ice? really? that's your claim?

 

Genesis 7: ¹² And the rain was upon the earth forty days and forty nights.

 

Genesis 7: 17 And the flood was forty days upon the earth; and the waters increased, and bare up the ark, and it was lift up above the earth.

 

Genesis 7: ²⁴ And the waters prevailed upon the earth an hundred and fifty days.

 

Genesis 8: 4 And the ark rested in the seventh month, on the seventeenth day of the month, upon the mountains of Ararat.

 

5 And the waters decreased continually until the tenth month: in the tenth month, on the first day of the month, were the tops of the mountains seen.

 

6 And it came to pass at the end of forty days, that Noah opened the window of the ark which he had made:

 

Genesis 8: ⁹ But the dove found no rest for the sole of her foot, and she returned unto him into the ark, for the waterswere on the face of the whole earth: then he put forth his hand, and took her, and pulled her in unto him into the ark.

¹⁰ And he stayed yet other seven days; and again he sent forth the dove out of the ark;

¹¹ And the dove came in to him in the evening; and, lo, in her mouth was an olive leaf pluckt off: so Noah knew that the waters were abated from off the earth.

¹² And he stayed yet other seven days; and sent forth the dove; which returned not again unto him any more.

 

40+40+150+40 + 7 + 7 = 284 days     284/30 = ~9.5 months

 

You asked: "So animals lasted almost a year floating on blocks of ice? really? that's your claim?"

 

No that's not my claim. and your math is WAY wrong to boot. We are given the precise date when the rains started  and the precise date when the flood waters were mostly gone and all the debris and dead bodies and possibly some other animals surviving on floating debris and possibly ice, and the Ark itself settled on somewhat dry or drying ground.

 

gen 7 11 In the six hundredth year of Noah’s life, on the seventeenth day of the second month—on that day all the springs of the great deep burst forth, and the floodgates of the heavens were opened. 

 

So we have 600-02-17 + 150 days takes us to 600-07-17  which = 5 Months, According to Gen 7:11 & Gen 8:4.  (600 = the year in Noahs life) Noah and Co. remained in the ark almost a year. the extra 284-150 = 134 days.

 

 

But animals outside the ark would have only needed to last 150 days before they would have some what dry ground to begin moving about again on. My assumption during this time is that the possible herbivores who survived during the 150 days could eat what little dying vegetation they could find and the carnivores would have a smorgasbord. Many herbivores can eat fruits and fruits would have survived somewhat floating in water.

 

And remember only 2 of a kind (male/female) needed to survive to keep the species going. Do we have any Mathematicians on the board to calculate the odds?

 

Also... during that 150 days water is slowly draining, at what day did mountian tops apear again and animals would have dry rocky land to swim toward?

Edited June 12, 2014 by Zakuska

[The Nehor]

You asked: "So animals lasted almost a year floating on blocks of ice? really? that's your claim?"

 

No that's not my claim. and your math is WAY wrong to boot. We are given the precise date when the rains started  and the precise date when the flood waters were mostly gone and all the debris and dead bodies and possibly some other animals surviving on floating debris and possibly ice, and the Ark itself settled on somewhat dry or drying ground.

 

gen 7 11 In the six hundredth year of Noah’s life, on the seventeenth day of the second month—on that day all the springs of the great deep burst forth, and the floodgates of the heavens were opened. 

 

So we have 600-02-17 + 150 days takes us to 600-07-17  which = 5 Months, According to Gen 7:11 & Gen 8:4.  (600 = the year in Noahs life) Noah and Co. remained in the ark almost a year. the extra 284-150 = 134 days.

 

 

But animals outside the ark would have only needed to last 150 days before they would have some what dry ground to begin moving about again on. My assumption during this time is that the possible herbivores who survived during the 150 days could eat what little dying vegetation they could find and the carnivores would have a smorgasbord. Many herbivores can eat fruits and fruits would have survived somewhat floating in water.

 

And remember only 2 of a kind (male/female) needed to survive to keep the species going. Do we have any Mathematicians on the board to calculate the odds?

 

Also... during that 150 days water is slowly draining, at what day did mountian tops apear again and animals would have dry rocky land to swim toward?

 

Did you get your idea of how animals can survive from watching Ice Age?

[Zakuska]

Did you get your idea of how animals can survive from watching Ice Age?

 

Wouldn't that be the other way round?

[thesometimesaint]

No, my point was that just because its a story from scripture doesnt make it automatically metaphorical.

 

It is doesn't make your interpretation of it automatically literal true either.

 

In the Book of Mormon, the Jaredites are the descendants of Jared, his brother, their immediate family, and their friends. At the time of the Tower of Babel, when the tongues of all nations were confounded, the Lord acceded to the desires of Jared such that his people's language was not confounded. They were also granted a land of promise.The Lord guided these people through the wilderness, and were eventually directed to cross the sea in barges..

These vessels were sealed and watertight and able to be swamped by waves without sinking. Air was obtained from outside the vessels as needed^. They also brought with them animals and food.

[Zakuska]

It is doesn't make your interpretation of it automatically literal true either.

 

In the Book of Mormon, the Jaredites are the descendants of Jared, his brother, their immediate family, and their friends. At the time of the Tower of Babel, when the tongues of all nations were confounded, the Lord acceded to the desires of Jared such that his people's language was not confounded. They were also granted a land of promise.The Lord guided these people through the wilderness, and were eventually directed to cross the sea in barges..

These vessels were sealed and watertight and able to be swamped by waves without sinking. Air was obtained from outside the vessels as needed^. They also brought with them animals and food.

Species transplants?