Science

Scripture

 Topics

Other Topics

The New 3 "Rs"

Thanksgiving - Origin

Christmas - Origin

Truth, Integrity & Ethics

Science and Religion

Famous American Quotes

Homosexuality

Whale Evolution (Macro)

 

 

 

 

 

Misc. Areas of Interest

Reviews (Books)

Reviews (Movies)

Abortion

Josephus & Christianity

Christians Need Evolution

Why did Jesus not return?

Why evidence is not effective

 

 

 Links

Science & Religion links

Science-Religion Conflicts

 Human Migration

Adam & Eve - Genomics

The Church & Evolution

Intelligent Design

Young Earth Creationism

Theistic Evolution

Christianity & Evolution

 

 

  Summary

Macroevolution is true

Human evolution is true

Scriptures are not inspired

Theism not believable

It's not about the evidence

World Views In Collision

 

Why Care?

 

 

Feelings.  Red pill - Blue pill

Terms

Vestigial Structures

Atavisms

DNA Evidence - Insertions

 1. ERVs   2. Transposons

Human Chrom. 2 Fusion

Pseudogenes

Human Lice & Evolution

Why did they say that?

Old Testament

    Job

    Old Testament Narratives

    Biblical Genocide

    Noahian Flood

    "Firmament" - Flat Earth

Document Changes

Scriptural Contradictions

Who Wrote The Bible?

 

 

 

Veritas Super Omnia 

Items

Origine

Noachian Flood 1

It would be hard to imagine a subject with more discussion in regards to creation and evolution than the narrative of Noah’s Flood.  It is certainly a cornerstone of the three monotheistic religions of the world, and thus actively defended by many. A recent Google search for biblical or Noah's Flood returned 324,000 entries.  Although many religious persons may feel it is allegorical or of limited geographical application (a local flood), most creationists read it as predominantly literal.   Much of the discussion becomes very technical and it is easy and expected that one would become mired in opposing details when attempting to see if this narrative could be true or is myth, and lose the ability to evaluate evidences for strength and logic.  Pointing to the common flood stories around the world, skeptics list this as evidence that the Noah's Flood narrative borrowed from more ancient cultures around them, whereas biblicists count this as independent evidence that a universal flood did occur.  That does not help us decide if the story is probably true or not.

 

The bible is specific in much of the narrative. Eight people are the only humans to survive a flood inside a wooden 450 ft. ark.  It rains for 40 days and the people and animals stay inside the ark for 371 days.  The pro and con arguments are well developed by both sides. There are currently 3 - 30 million species of animals on our planet, including those in the sea, birds, mammals, insects, etc.

 

Rather than trying to survey all the issues, only a few will be discussed here.  The reader is directed to sites or other sources that question if the flood story could be true or is logical given the issues. Two points need to be stressed. One, that just generating  possible  explanations is not acceptable.  We need to focus on probabilities and it's not enough to just propose any solution - it needs to make predictions, be logical, coherent, and be testable if possible.  We could all be 10 seconds old, created with the appearance of age and with implanted memories of the past - a possibility - but not testable, probable, or even rational.  When looking at the following issues, think about all the explanations that are put forward and if they are just possibilities or if they are probabilities and do they make predictions that we can test in the future rather than trying to fit the data to preconceived naratives.  Second, read both sides of the issues, point by point.  Which explanations or skepticisms in the end really make sense?  Below are some actual published young earth creationist writings or thoughts on the following subjects.  On page two of this site are listed links with some of the better sources for both views in the Reference section.  "Might have,  could have, or maybe it was..." appear weak and pleading. They are not evidence nor convincing.

 

 

1. How could the ark hold all the land species?  

 

~ "The majority of the total species are capable of surviving in the water".  Insects, worms, spiders, plants, etc. can survive salt water for a year?

 

~ "Amphibians need not have been included" (they can survive salt water for over a year?) Is this true?

 

~ "Insect species among the arthropods are small.  Many of the 35,000 species of worms as well as many insects could have survived outside the ark". True?

 

~ Woodmorappe: "credibly demonstrates that as few as 2,000 - 16,000 animals could have been needed" (Are his assumptions and calculations believable? Microevolution from a basic stock species is only needed to produce various "kinds" after the flood, and these total over 3 million in just a few thousand years after the flood?)

 

~ Dinsosaurs and other large animals would have been brought aboard as young. (Evidence for dinosaurs and most mammals including man living at the same time?  Where in the bible is it stated that this happened, and if this is the only way why not mention it in the story to begin with?)

 

2. What about the freshwater fish?

 

~ Preflood oceans were less salty. True? Evidence?

 

~ Fish then had the ability to tolerate changes in salinity, like some species today. Evidence? All the freshwater fish? Suddenly their kidneys just switched over to salt water living?

 

~ During the flood, fresh and salt water formed layers where the freshwater fish could have survived. Probability or just a hope?  Evidence?  Experiments to show this?

 

~ Many went extinct, as the abundance of marine fossils demonstrate.  Does the pattern in the fossil record show this?

 

3. Construction of the Ark.

 

~ Noah did it under divine guidance. God helped him somehow.

 

~ He probably hired additional workers.    Biblical passages to support?

 

4.  How did all the animals get to the ark?

 

~ God gathered them for Noah. It was supernatural help.

 

~ The continents were together at that time (Plate tectonics - does the flood really fit all the evidence from fossils, geology, glacial orientation, paleomagnitism?)

 

5. Feeding, water, sanitation

 

~ Animals went into a type of dormancy, and any latent ability was "supernaturally intensified"  (All of them? Evidence?)

 

~ God controlled their voiding or "they were trained to defecate on command into buckets to help the family cope" with the need to remove wastes.  (thousands of animals? This was actually stated on a well 'respected' YEC site)

 

6. What about the plants?  Could they really survive a year in salt water floating and waiting to land on dry land? What did all the herbivores eat when they left the ark?

 

7. How could the flood deposit up to 39,000 ft of mud in some places and have it all turn to sedimentary rock in one year?  That's 6 - 7 miles of sedimentary rock that are known in some locations.

 

8. Source of flood waters?  The "canopy theory" has basically been discarded by creationists after calculations showed it would cook the surface.  Also, see how the ancients viewed the earth,  see page this web site here.  Evidence for source of water and not just conjecture?  Testable hypotheses?

 

9. Glaciers after the flood?

 

10. All the continents moved apart in one year?  (Does Plate Tectonics really fit well into "flood geology"?)

 

11. Biogeography after the flood?  How did all the unique animals and plants get to their destinations and so quickly, all over the globe and onto the various oceanic islands? How did koala bears get 9,000 miles to Australia and what did they eat on the way, since their diet is so specialized?  Why did they not leave evidence behind as their populations moved south?

 

12. This means all the radiometric dating that shows millions of years between sediments  is wrong.  Despite over 50 years of trying to show multiple dating techniques wrong, YECs have yet to convince anyone that the earth is young. See Weins this site (Link).  See also a review of the RATE project (link).

 

13. Fossil reefs take thousands of years to form. They are found in various layers of the fossil record. How could a flood do that? Do the following make sense?

 

~The reef sections were transported there and then buried at different levels.  

 

~Many fossil reefs just appear to be previous reefs; some are difficult to identify.

 

When geologists in the 16th and 17th centuries ventured into the field to study the land (they were nearly all creationists at that time), the finding of fossil coral reefs sandwiched between lava flows caused many to abandon their flood models as an unworkable explanation for earth's geology.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Continued on next page  ------------------- >  click here