Ice Age Earth

[tzor]

I'm a personality prototype. You can tell, can't you?

[jonesthecurl]

Go stick your head in a pig.

[Beast Of Burson]

Well, how far down the Biblical rabbit hole do you want to go? For starters, the glaciers all melted more than 10,000 years ago, which would I believe be in conflict with the established Biblical timeline for when the flood was supposed to occur, about 4,000 years ago.

Biblical rabbit hole? Why are we talking about the Bible, or even the 'established' timeline of the Bible? There are over 200 religions and cultures over the world that recorded and passed on orally and in written form a very similar story about the great flood. Shall we conclude all their stories have the same timeline?

If you want to debate a hypothesis, you need to be specific about its nature. Since presumably most or all of the existing cultural stories about a great flood will differ in the details about how it happened, it is not enough to specify whether a "great flood" occurred, but when, how, and for how long it lasted. We cannot make any progress on the issue until that has been indicated. So if you are not talking about the flood of Genesis, then which one are you talking about? Or do you want us to try and simultaneously discuss all 200 stories at the same time? I have started off with one particular narrative that I thought would be relevant to you, but if you prefer a different narrative, please be specific.

Timelines and the one version out of 200+ that you choose to start with aside, I'm not sure any of this relates to how so many have come to the conclusion that there was no great flood.

I can't speak for everyone, but perhaps it has to do with the fact that there's no strong contemporary geological evidence to suggest that a global flood occurred.

I would be curious to see your source for the official established timeline for a story in the Book of Genesis, if you would be so kind.

Obviously I have very little knowledge about Biblical scholarship, but I was referring to the well-known Ussher timeline. As far as I am aware other timelines that are still young Earth creationist in nature don't put the age at greater than 10,000 years, i.e. after the end of the last glacial maximum.

Besides the fact there has been (ignored) evidence all along but the scientific community exiled and banned scientists for life because their findings had yet to be 'understood' and synthesized with other scientific fields with other discoveries of evidence that had not been presented, tested, backed up and certified....discoveries made all the way up until now. Yup, that kind of stuff we only 'know' about reserved for theorizing the sun revolves around the earth still goes on today in established science. There in fact is strong contemporary geological evidence to show for a fact that a global great flood occurred, and it's not only geological either. I am glad to go all the way down the rabbit hole as to when, how, how long, and much more in specific details. Progress is trying to be made as we speak, right here in real time, but there can be no progress and I'm not going to be getting detailed until we can start talking about the great flood and it's clear we aren't talking about the Bible, and we aren't talking about young earth creationists.

It could be the great flood of Genesis, it could be Ussher's 'theoretical' timeline is incorrect, it could be it doesn't matter how well something is 'known' as well which makes a thing true or false. Nobody knew what a dinosaur was until 1938, so everybody 'knew' there was no such thing as dinosaurs in 1937. Humanity has not discovered everything there is to be discovered in the world, and until we have, new discoveries are going to be made all the time. Certainly discoveries can either confirm or challenge what 'everyone knows' or what is 'well known' and sometimes discoveries have and can still turn what everyone knows into incorrect knowledge and evolving historic models.

Think about this for a second. Human beings as we are in our current state have been living on this planet for around 200,000 years. Established history in our textbooks barely represents 5% of human history. 95% is missing. There is virtually ALL of human history left to still discover. We'll probably never get all of history from all humanity, but think about how much history we could gain and what it would do to our understanding of history if we got up to 10%. How about 5% to 6%? a 1% increase in discovering and understanding human history will likely change 'everything we know'.

Agreed. Very well put

[Phatscotty]

Why is Phatts is so concerned about the "Great Floods" destroying mankind?

He should be posting a new thread on how to prevent the next "Great Flood."

Phatts, you believe in science? All that hot air you are producing on this thread is probably elevating our planet's temperature.

Already did that as well as try a few different other ways. I don't find it ironic at all that the very thread where I did exactly what you suggest here is the very thread where a question still awaits you to face up to your own comments. ke-sa-ra!

[Phatscotty]

So phat, what it comes down to is this, unless religion, gov't or the wealthy who actually control everything, approve it. Anyone who profers a different view point is ostracized,ridiculed or just flat ignored. Humorous at the start of this election campaign a few of our political giants, stated flat out global warming was a pseudo science, in reference to the world leaders making an attempt to slow it down.calling it fear mongering, those same politicians are on board with screaming all Muslims are terrorists. Odd isn't it? Demanding irrefutable evidence ignoring it on one hand, and using a radical group to demonize an entire religion, lets see how the big money's view plays out in a couple of decades, after all we don't have a choice they have the money

Human beings deal with the reality of the shadow in four different ways
Denial
Projection
Integration
Transmutation

[Phatscotty]

Let's leave aside the fact that you said, and I quote, "nobody knew what a dinosaur was before 1938." I will grant that somehow you can twist that to mean that nobody outside the scientific community knew what a dinosaur was before 1938, because I am a magnanimous and humble individual. Now I have no idea when the existence of dinosaurs became commonplace teaching in schools, but the existence of dinosaurs was known to the public well before 1938. For example, Arthur Conan Doyle's famous work The Lost World came out in 1912. And I think it's safe to say that if Arthur Conan Doyle was how the public first learned of dinosaurs, it wouldn't be Sherlock Holmes he's most famous for.

i just read a book on fossils...mid and late 1800s was big for paleontology and for ancient extinct life form collection including dinosaurs and their footprints

I don't think you are taking into account, that during the 1800's a large number of people were illiterate, book may have been published, but how many outside scientific community knew about it,you seem to be operating on the premise the tools you have today were available then. Simply not so,remember what the world looked like then, and what forms of communication was in place and the fact a simple telegraph message was expensive then by today's standards

Yes this book was about the scientific understanding of these fossils and the evolution of their understanding of them and did not take much account of those who rejected the facts as fiction because it was contrary to their worldview. There were educated people who believed that extinction of a species meant that God wasn't perfect in his creation and therefore rejected even the possibility of previous life forms that do not presently exist. And those that were fossil hunters were often amateur and misidentified them, even the experts miss-classified them often.

Again, keep in mind this has nothing to do with the topic and is only a side challenge to a side point that could easily have been accepted as 1938 and 1912 aren't that far apart, nor does any of it change my point of how/why ROUGHLY when everyone laughed about dinosaurs and the gap until everyone knew about dinosaurs. Let me try to make the same point about human beings another way.

The majority of human beings who did not see the Wright brothers fly in person still refused to believe flight was possible for many years after flight had already been achieved. I specifically did not name or look up the year and made sure my spelling is accurate so we can digest the overall point and move on rather than pretend my spelling or chronology would actually change the point anyways.

[Phatscotty]

I prefer to get my science from scientists, not religious folk. I don't get my religion from scientists either.

so you are totally cool with the fact that the science community still exiles good science and the scientists that produce good science based on the premise said good science doesn't fit with current establishment models, which I'm guessing is one of the main reasons why you pay no attention to religion. Makes sense brah

[Phatscotty]

Well, how far down the Biblical rabbit hole do you want to go? For starters, the glaciers all melted more than 10,000 years ago, which would I believe be in conflict with the established Biblical timeline for when the flood was supposed to occur, about 4,000 years ago.

Biblical rabbit hole? Why are we talking about the Bible, or even the 'established' timeline of the Bible? There are over 200 religions and cultures over the world that recorded and passed on orally and in written form a very similar story about the great flood. Shall we conclude all their stories have the same timeline?

Timelines and the one version out of 200+ that you choose to start with aside, I'm not sure any of this relates to how so many have come to the conclusion that there was no great flood. I would be curious to see your source for the official established timeline for a story in the Book of Genesis, if you would be so kind.

Various parts of the Earth have been flooded or under-water at various times. Some of this was caused long-term geological stuff, so by very big storms. Even todays parts of the populated planet get flooded. A Hurricane the size of Katrina; or a Tsunami like those experiences in the Asian / Pacific Islands cause massive floods.

Pre-historic people would look at floods like these, and think they covered "The Entire Earth", because from their point of view... living in a small area, not wandering far from where they were born, not communicating with people in other parts of the continent or world, etc... they essentially were covering their entire world.

If that's what you mean by "Great Flood". Fine.

If you mean a flood that literally covered the Entire World. No.
If you mean a flood that involved a man and his family building a boat; and putting all species of animals on it. No.

Try this on for size, integrate it, see what comes out the other end.

How about, I mean a giant comet 100 miles in diameter slammed directly into the North American ice sheet stacked up to 2 miles high in some places stretching from the North pole to Iowa, resulting in an 18 degree (f) spike in global temperature in a span ranging from 2 weeks tops at most to 48 hours at least, integrating also the other giant ice sheet on the other side of the planet along with the South Pole. Then could it make sense there is no way such a resulting flood could not flood the entire world, qualify as a great flood, regardless of if anyone built a boat or not?

[Phatscotty]

Dry Falls, Washington State



Each horseshoe is at least 7-10 times bigger than Niagara Falls, and there are at least 7 horseshoes. I don't expect anyone is able to fathom how much water that is, but I do expect every single person to understand the amount is unfathomable.

[Phatscotty]

I prefer to get my science from scientists, not religious folk. I don't get my religion from scientists either.

so you are totally cool with the fact that the science community still exiles good science and the scientists that produce good science based on the premise said good science doesn't fit with current establishment models, which I'm guessing is one of the main reasons why you pay no attention to religion. Makes sense brah

This is what I'm talking about. This statement has so many levels of bullshit tied in a Gordian knot. It is exactly the kind of statement that schiro or Aslan would make. Also, your earlier big post with the pretty pictures is exactly the kind of pseudoscience they bring to the table.

Glad to tackle this one piece at a time. Let's start with the levels of bullshit, hopefully admitting up front none of this has anything to do with taking the Bible literally as well as I've been so busy the last 2 days since pretty pic post I have been missing a butt-load of game turns, I'll throw my cards on the table with the name of the scientist exiled, why he was exiled, and why now after many other discoveries synthesized with various other scientific fields over the last 80-or-so years that he indeed discovered the smoking gun and while only in the underground stage right now that smoking gun is what is going to bring the great flood stories back into text books. I think we can reach the goal of at least understanding each other more clearly relatively easy this way. Deal?

[Phatscotty]

meant to be edited into the post I just finished but will just make separate, don't forget Doomer who you are talking to I'm already years past the understanding that I can waltz into a 'debate' on the theory of evolution, 100% only use Darwin's own words and Darwin's own theory, and get kicked out of that 'debate', labeled a bible thumper and an evolution denier. All that has already happened, all that is what's happening here, all that will continue to happen. I'm just making my mark and trying to learn and help others learn along the way.

[jgordon1111]

Pseudo science, well apparently the hop front runner thinks global warming is still bs, his rally in NH with the reality sit com useta was, in fact said Brrr global warming(big smile shake of the head)its freezing out there, nevermind it middle of January, a week ago cherry blossoms bloomed in DC, and only recently had the temperature really dropped. Yes it is all pseudo science

[Bernie Sanders]

Well, how far down the Biblical rabbit hole do you want to go? For starters, the glaciers all melted more than 10,000 years ago, which would I believe be in conflict with the established Biblical timeline for when the flood was supposed to occur, about 4,000 years ago.

Biblical rabbit hole? Why are we talking about the Bible, or even the 'established' timeline of the Bible? There are over 200 religions and cultures over the world that recorded and passed on orally and in written form a very similar story about the great flood. Shall we conclude all their stories have the same timeline?

Timelines and the one version out of 200+ that you choose to start with aside, I'm not sure any of this relates to how so many have come to the conclusion that there was no great flood. I would be curious to see your source for the official established timeline for a story in the Book of Genesis, if you would be so kind.

Various parts of the Earth have been flooded or under-water at various times. Some of this was caused long-term geological stuff, so by very big storms. Even todays parts of the populated planet get flooded. A Hurricane the size of Katrina; or a Tsunami like those experiences in the Asian / Pacific Islands cause massive floods.

Pre-historic people would look at floods like these, and think they covered "The Entire Earth", because from their point of view... living in a small area, not wandering far from where they were born, not communicating with people in other parts of the continent or world, etc... they essentially were covering their entire world.

If that's what you mean by "Great Flood". Fine.

If you mean a flood that literally covered the Entire World. No.
If you mean a flood that involved a man and his family building a boat; and putting all species of animals on it. No.

Try this on for size, integrate it, see what comes out the other end.

How about, I mean a giant comet 100 miles in diameter slammed directly into the North American ice sheet stacked up to 2 miles high in some places stretching from the North pole to Iowa, resulting in an 18 degree (f) spike in global temperature in a span ranging from 2 weeks tops at most to 48 hours at least, integrating also the other giant ice sheet on the other side of the planet along with the South Pole. Then could it make sense there is no way such a resulting flood could not flood the entire world, qualify as a great flood, regardless of if anyone built a boat or not?

!00 diameter mile comet slams into Earth into North America?

Game over.

[Phatscotty]

If it doesn't have to do with taking the Bible literally, what does it have to do with? Crackpot biblical literalists that thrive with freedom of speech and freedom of ignorance?

First, have you or have you not noted that I have been the one turning away Biblical interpretations? I have been the one making sure we aren't talking about the Bible before moving forward into the science, I have been the one asking people to please not respond about Noah?

Second, it has to do with the great flood being a real event, crudely documented through oral tradition by over 200 religions and cultures around the world. I don't look at the great flood as 'either the Bible is right or wrong', I look at it the same way I look at 'religion vs evolution'. Science is proving as we speak the great flood did in fact take place, but that doesn't mean THE BIBLE IS CORRECT or that the story is correct or that therefore the entire Bible is correct. It means the story in Genesis alludes to a factual event, is a piece of rough history, and should not be ignored simply because the Bible was the best place to ensure such a story survived. To me, all it means is that a story from pre-history (as we know it) survived a cataclysm or 2 and is best handed down to us as can be. To me, I can easily understand how humanity would make sure sure SURE to never forget this story as it's not only important historically but also there may be information the ancients knew on how to know when the cause of the flood may be coming again and how to pass that information through thousands of generations, but that's for another thread.

btw, I don't see religion and evolution as opposed at all. It makes sense to me they are both equally important parts of the same overriding truth made up of many truths of which many still remain undiscovered, and to some they are only undiscovered simply because they cannot be measured with an electronic device, while others use what humanity views as undiscovered everyday and don't care if it can be measured or if others deny it. A dream cannot be recorded or shown to anyone else, does that therefore mean dreams do not exist? Don't get caught up in that last question, it's just an example, but if it must go for it making another thread

[Phatscotty]

Pseudo science, well apparently the hop front runner thinks global warming is still bs, his rally in NH with the reality sit com useta was, in fact said Brrr global warming(big smile shake of the head)its freezing out there, nevermind it middle of January, a week ago cherry blossoms bloomed in DC, and only recently had the temperature really dropped. Yes it is all pseudo science

it's okay. It's still underground, but at least the establishment can no longer ignore THIS much hard science that contradicts their comfort zones. I get it. It means they have been offering out master's degree's in certain fields based on incorrect models and information. But like I said, it's a mistake in the first place to think we have discovered everything and no new discoveries can be made in the future that could challenge or even change everything we thought we knew and certainly what has been taught. The people who have been studying this have been laughed at and shrugged off as pseudo scientists for decades. That all ceased 6 months ago, and now it's only a matter of 'how well known' the new science is. I've already tried to show it a couple different ways, met with 'meh, who wants to watch a 4 hour video?' and 'well, I don't believe in the Bible, therefore the great flood is impossible'. I'm doing this the best way I can which is turning out to be the hard way, but it's cool because that's how I learned everything about this and now I am moving into learning how to be able to share/teach it by backing it up with science and only science. Not only for everyone else, but for myself too. I need to know these things in a world full of people who auto-laugh many times without knowing a single thing about said laughter inducing ideas. It's the same reason I don't laugh at people who think the moon landing was a hoax, and that reason is I don't know why some people think that. Only when I look at the reasons and then try to understand them will I be comfortable laughing, or not laughing. ok, so now 2 pages making this about the moon landing

[Phatscotty]

I have to go to work to make money and stuff, but I'm gonna leave this question before I go and can't wait to see the answers when I get back in 9-10-12 hours.

What happened to the Woolly Mammoths and saber-toothed Tigers? How did they go extinct?

[jgordon1111]

Over-hunting by humans.

Funny thing is on the serious side, a substantial number of people probably believe its a ABSOLUTE fact

[Bernie Sanders]

Over-hunting by humans.

Yes, humans love meat.

[Metsfanmax]

I prefer to get my science from scientists, not religious folk. I don't get my religion from scientists either.

so you are totally cool with the fact that the science community still exiles good science and the scientists that produce good science based on the premise said good science doesn't fit with current establishment models, which I'm guessing is one of the main reasons why you pay no attention to religion. Makes sense brah

How would you know the difference between 'good' climate science and 'bad' climate science, such that you were even competent to judge whether this statement applies to climate science?

[Phatscotty]

Over-hunting by humans.

Funny thing is on the serious side, a substantial number of people probably believe its a ABSOLUTE fact

oof-da. Well.. um, idk about that, I'm on break, came here to drop a nugget in case riskllama starts in again about Tool songs.



I can address this theory later about how a tiny population of humans killed 3 species of north american elephants to extinction 12,000 years ago but I guess Africans might not like to eat meat that much. And all the saber-tooth tigers too? All the giant beavers and giant sloths? All the woolly rhinos and short faced bears, all the giant otters and giant horses too? Even the American cheetah and lions? Along with 30-odd more species of giant mammals.....Before they could even reproduce? Doomer, what do you base the over-hunting theory on?

RARRRRRRRRRR!

[hotfire]

they obviously never existed!!! those damned scientists are at their BS again! thankfully people not trained in science are here to save the day!