|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,915 Year: 4,172/9,624 Month: 1,043/974 Week: 2/368 Day: 2/11 Hour: 1/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: What happened to all the dead rotting carcasses? | |||||||||||||||||||||||
John Inactive Member |
quote: hmmmm.... You are a flat-earth geocentrist too now eh? ------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
funkmasterfreaky Inactive Member |
Yeah pretty much. lol I just think that we all take this much too serious.. You know you'd almost think it made a difference in the world if we could prove a point. I guess i can't speak for all but i think alot of attitudes here are much bigger than their case. I'm probably the worst. Thought if we joke around a bit it may make this a little more enjoyable. I've been informed by people that know me, and have read some of my posts that i need to use smily faces more so other people know i'm joking. I am but an infant in Christ i know not how to defend him somethimes, and i act like peter in the garden and i lash out with a sword. I am trying to be a little less cutting, and have some fun here.
I thought Chara's question a good one. How many people are estimated to have been there according to science? ------------------saved by grace
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
John Inactive Member |
quote: I can't find anything directly relevant. I'd guess maybe 100 million globally. I would like to see some good data though. ------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
David unfamous Inactive Member |
I find this quite interesting. I thought there'd be a tailored answer to this question.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Karl Inactive Member |
quote: Then you won't mind taking a little advice from Saint Augustine?
quote:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Randy Member (Idle past 6277 days) Posts: 420 From: Cincinnati OH USA Joined: |
quote: You can find estimates of world population at U.S. Census Bureau: Page not found They vary quit a bit and of course it depends on when the supposed worldwide flood is supposed to have occurred. AiG puts the flood at around 2500 BC, during the 4th Egyptian Dynasty and during the early dynastic period in Sumer which followed the Urik and Jedmat Nasr periods and about the time that civilization were developing in the Indus Valley and China so the population was probably about 15-30 million and it would seem that the vast majority of them somehow failed to notice the worldwide flood and kept on about their business as if it had never occurred. When you are talking about animals it is a different story. There are estimated to be about 800 billion fossils of animals in the Karoo formation in South Africa alone. Problems with a Global Flood, 2nd edition All of them are Permian and early Triassic animals so when you put them with all the late Triassic, Jurassic and Cretaceous animals as well as whatever tertiary fossils are supposed to be flood deposits you find that the pre-flood earth must have had animals standing one atop the other or at least shoulder to shoulder over its entire surface. Randy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
John Inactive Member |
quote: Thanks. I couldn't tell you how many times I have looked for a chart like that. Looks like my estimate was way off. According to the chart and when the flood occurred, we are looking at 5 to 25 million humans. ------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Randy Member (Idle past 6277 days) Posts: 420 From: Cincinnati OH USA Joined: |
quote: You're welcome. I guess that if there were 10,000,000 people on earth at the time of the flood of Noah about 9,990,000 somehow failed to notice it. On the other hand for the YEC senario to be correct there must have been zillions of dinosaurs and therapsid reptiles and later beasties literally covering the surface of the earth so there should have been a LOT of rotting carcasses post flood. Even 5 million humans must have been a little crowed preflood especially since you also need vast forests covering the entire surface of the earth to account for all the coal that was supposedly produced by the flood. The YEC preflood earth would have been a pretty amazing place. Randy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
funkmasterfreaky Inactive Member |
quote: Not a bad quote, though you must understand something though i appear to be quite the fool, it does not mean that this dumbass isn't doing alot of homework on things he has yet to open his mouth about. I do attemtpt to learn always, i think we can agree that nothing in science is proven. Not in my definition of the word. And that it may for now be shown to be incorrect but with more study may be shown to be correct. I do not take ANYONE on their word, in this area i think i am more the skeptic on here than anyone else. How many brilliant scientific minds have been discredited and called fools in their day by "higher criticism" only to proven correct long after their deaths. Let us be more careful at what we decide we should flush, to avoid future embarrasment. I think it was einstein though i could be very wrong but i thought it was him that said, creativity is the most important part of science. Not to say the rest doesn't matter. But look at a man like Da Vinci WOW. Incredible mind, and why? because he had the ability to bring his creativity into science, and his art was great because of his science in his creating. I'll try and keep the sword put away... ------------------saved by grace
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Randy Member (Idle past 6277 days) Posts: 420 From: Cincinnati OH USA Joined: |
quote: Yes Leonardo was so advanced that he understood that there never was a worldwide flood and that fossils on mountain tops were evidence of mountain building and not a flood. You can read about it http://www.ucmp.berkeley.edu/history/vinci.html
quote: [Fixed close quote. --Admin] [This message has been edited by Admin, 11-27-2002]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Coragyps Member (Idle past 765 days) Posts: 5553 From: Snyder, Texas, USA Joined: |
Thanks for that link, Randy - I've read Gould on this, but didn't have the reference to ol' Leo himself.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
6000yrs Inactive Junior Member |
first of all it was an olive leaf and there is no mention of plucking off a fig or any tree for that matter.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
John Inactive Member |
Plucking off a fig?
The Hebrew word is 'taraph' and it means 'plucked off.' Look it up at No webpage found at provided URL: www.bluuletterbible.org. Click the 'C' icon next to Gen 8:11 and it will give you the Hebrew and Greek witha translation reference and Strong's numbers. ------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Jesuslover153 Inactive Member |
I just have to get into this one too..
First off the fossil record would be fair to explain what happened to the animals... a passage in the end of Ezekiel 26 I believe explains where the humans where put...Second I believe that there were two biblical events that would explain fossils.. one the Great Flood two the whole Babylon experience, I believe that Pangaea existed up till this time and it is here that it is broken apart and our current continental situation was brought forth.. this process would not have left as many fossils but certainly it could have... And I also have to wonder in lew of this thought how would we be able to seperate from the fossils which were laid out in the two different events...We would have a third type of event(s) that would cause fossils of another type, which is where the uniformitarinists talk about localised events causing fossils... As we know it does not take a huge amount of years to cause fossils, just the right circumstance.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
lpetrich Inactive Member |
Jesuslover153:
Second I believe that there were two biblical events that would explain fossils.. one the Great Flood two the whole Babylon experience, I believe that Pangaea existed up till this time and it is here that it is broken apart and our current continental situation was brought forth.. this process would not have left as many fossils but certainly it could have... Galloping continents. However, for some strange reason, the continents have slowed their drifting down to exactly the rate that one deduces with the help of radioisotope dating of rocks. Currently, the rate is typically around ~3 cm/yr, as can be deduced from earthquake effects, VLBI, and GPS measurements. Over 200 million years, this adds up to ~6000 km, which is about the distance from their Pangaea positions. Furthermore, there is an abundance of evidence for pre-Pangaea continental drift. There are some old mountain ranges, like the Appalachians and the Urals, which are results of the formation of Pangaea from earlier continents. And there are several orogens, mountain-range roots, that date back much further, some to over 2 billion years. So continents have been playing "bumper cars" for the last 2 billion years. As we know it does not take a huge amount of years to cause fossils, just the right circumstance Why drag in such irrelevancies? Fossils are NOT dated by estimates of how long they take to form.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024