Quote: "The sites you recommended seem to show that there are some varieties of sea shells on mountain tops." Thanks for finally admitting that there are seashells on mountaintops. I am sure that bit of humility was out of character for someone as yourself.
I didn't recommend any particular sites, I just showed you how to search google to see that there are many that admit that there are seashells on mountaintops.
No atheistic geologist, scientist or whatever, is going to connect global marine fossils to the global flood. That would entail giving credit to the Bible and not in line with their agenda. Any that do count that as evidence as a likely global flood are then attacked as having no " legitimate training and any real experience in the real rock record" solely for recognizing said evidence.
Your quote: "the earth does not have enough water to cover these mountains." No one disagrees that the earth doesn't have enough water to cover mountains as tall as they are today. Funny that opposers will say that in relation to trying to disprove the flood but then the same ones will say: "Shell deposits on mountaintops indicate that mountains have been formed by the uplift of sea bottoms", which is exactly what a global flood would have caused, especially as the water receded. I would think that an unimaginable weight of cooling water would somehow affect the movement of tectonic plates.
Really disingenuous to say that the anti-God camp can say that the mountains were not as tall when the marine fossils on mountaintops were deposited but to say that's impossible for believers in the Bible to believe the same thing.
Mountains were taller ages ago. Erosion, mud slides, earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, rocks cracking and breaking away occurs all the time, making mountains shorter through time. The Old Man Of The Mountains, in New Hampshire, is gone due to erosion. This makes the mountain smaller. Mud slides around the world make mountains shorter. Mount St. Helen was left with a crater on its north side after the eruption in 1980.
Earlier you said: "Shell deposits on mountaintops indicate that mountains have been formed by the uplift of sea bottoms." Now you say: "Mountains were taller ages ago."
Are you saying that when sea shells and marine fossils were deposited on mountain tops that the mountains were much taller then or are you saying you don't believe that mountains have sea shells or marine fossils on them?
Also don't forget your previous: "the earth does not have enough water to cover these mountains." but apparently you believe it did ages ago when "Mountains were taller ages ago." It's almost like you are arguing with your self. One comment argues with the previous.
How am I arguing with myself, when I say "the earth does not have enough water to cover these mountains" and "Mountains were taller ages ago." Mountains were taller ages ago, which makes it harder to cover them with water.
You suggested that one of my comments argues with the previous. I proved you wrong with a simple explanation, clearly seen before you try to change the thought. Shell deposits on mountain tops indicating that mountains have been formed by the uplift of sea bottoms is a mere theory with little support. It may seem likely that these deposits were once at the bottom of oceans, and that some process lifted them up to create mountains. Don't forget that seashell life is normally deposited at the bottom of oceans. The process formed to lift them up to a mountain top is questionable. I understand how difficult all of this is for you to comprehend, as thinking outside any aid of the Watchtower is not easy for any Jehovah's Witness. Thank you for your interest.
Can you explain how the idea that some very tall mountains have sea shells on top, has any evidence of a biblical flood depositing them there?
Quote from your answer on August 29, "From what I understand, mountains have not always been as tall as they are now and some very tall mountains even have sea shells on top." "These waters fell upon the earth in Noah’s day."
"I always wondered how they knew it covered the entire planet, being as they hadn't discovered it all yet."
If "they" are taking God's word for it ... then all the land mass discoveries are FAKE NEWS. They'd already been discovered! Or everybody could discover ever place! They'd just have to go there! That would sure change the history books!!
No, you got it wrong. God was going to make it rain for 400 days. But then Noah suggested that he save water by making it rain for 40-days and 40-nights and then wait for the sewers to back up. That seemed to do the trick.
Seriously, I read somewhere recently that scientists (and not "climatologists") have discovered a vast underground ocean. (It's gotta be true, it's on the Internet, "they" wouldn't lie!) Could be that that's where all that HIJKLMNO came from?
if it happened, it was manifested out of nothingness, beyond the Earth plane. God knows not the limitations of physical plane consciousness and physical plane manifestations...
That there was a catastrophic flood in late prehistory is almost undeniable, all texts from the region and even from as far away as India mention it, the only thing that changes is the name of the protagonist - Noah, Gilgamesh, Sargon the Great's g'g'grandfather. It was likely the one that inundated the fertile valley that is now the Black Sea. That was the world they knew. The tsunamis from that event would have lapped Ararat, so that fits too. Some guy puts Mom and the chickens on a barn door and floats the hell outta there - and Chinese whispers does the rest.
This post was edited by Slartibartfast at December 29, 2017 1:45 PM MST
I have heard several answers to that. The main Fundie Christian one being that the mountains were a lot lower in those days.
My own idea is that the flood was not all that global, Just a river flooding the low-lying villages near it. That is quite a common thing all over the globe. And quite a disaster for those it happens to and it can easily be interpereted as "the end of the world" by those it happens too, when they see "nothing but water" as far as they can see around them.
Are you saying that when sea shells and marine fossils were deposited on mountain tops that the mountains were much taller then or are you saying you don't believe that mountains have sea shells or marine fossils on them?
No. An example would be the Himalayas. They formed when the Indian sub-continent collided with the Asian plate. The mountains were slowly pushed upward (and they still are) to their present heights. The sea fossil found were pushed up with the mountains. Heck, I found a fossilized sponge near the rim of the Gang Canyon.
40 days of rain would not likely cause flooding to the tops of mountains. If there is so much underground water God could have just squeezed Earth a bit (like an orange) and there would be plenty of water to flood up to mountain tops. After while the water would just recede back underground. Rain and water are sometimes two different things also but cats & dogs might not be effective to do massive drownings.
Actually one effect of global warming will be more water wapor forming clouds in the atmosphere, that means that the rise in oceanic water-levels will not be quite as high as it would be if ALL the water from land-ice ended up in the oceans, then again warmer ocean water temperatures will make the water expand a tiny bit (causing a bit more rise), so all in all the numbers usually posted are correct
You're the one making a apparently outrageous claim, you should be the one providing the documentation. "Will there be some? ever? Because if there won't then don't expect any from me! Ever!" But that's mainly because you have none to offer.
(That comma between "won't" and "then" is improper punctuation by the way.)
antibiotic 