Flood vs Dudley

Dale Stuckwish

Meilleur contributeur

19 Aug 2023

Fish eating fish: These fossil fish show rapid burial in watery sedimentary strata and young age of the Earth. This happened during the Worldwide Genesis Flood of Noah's day ( Genesis 6-8).

M M

It isnt funny. Why laugh?

Dudley Barnes

Meilleur contributeur

M M Because it's not true, ......... It could have been a local mega flood.

How do you know it had to be the flood of Noah's day????

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Dudley Barnes Local megaflood here, local megaflood there, local megaflood everywhere ... wait, then it isn't local anymore?

Dudley Barnes

Meilleur contributeur

Hans-Georg Lundahl There have been many mega floods all over the world at various times. ....... Just do a search!

Here I'll save you the trouble.

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

J D

Dudley Barnes Wikipedia is biased. They're atheists.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Dudley Barnes some of these events are contested.

Black Sea flooded or slowly rose? Anyway, it's on my view post-Flood.

Only one of these is given as millions of years ago. The ones listed would, apart from this one, be too young, and as this one is the Mediterranean, it won't explain fossils found above ground.

I'd consider all of the listed events as direct or (especially for Black Sea) indirect and slightly delayed consequences of the Flood.

Your view is, these things happen all the time, over millions of years, and we take unknown local megafloods to account for any new example of rapid burial. I think my argument has a form reminiscent of Occam's razor - don't multiply flood events if one may do the work.

Dudley Barnes

Meilleur contributeur

Hans-Georg Lundahl They were just given as an example. ....... You can contest it, but we don't know what happen before recorded geology.

There is much evidences of asteroids and meteorites and major volcanic eruptions like the Deccan and Siberians traps causing mass extinctions at VARIOUS TIMES. .......

You cannot just take the easy way out lumping them all into one gigantic flood, without considering all these events. That's like burying your head in the sand.

Plus the varves of Lake Suigetsu has 70,000 years of recorded sediments. Which are measured and observed over many years.

If there were a global flood to extent promoted my YEC-ist there would only be 4400 varves at the most. ..... As the saying goes the rocks do not lie.

Take the time to study them well.

https://satoyama.pref.fukui.lg.jp/files/uploads/Lake/520Suigetsu/520Verves1.pdf*

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Dudley Barnes "but we don't know what happen before recorded geology."

We don't know naturally (i e except by revelation) what happened before recorded history (which begins in Genesis 2).

"You cannot just take the easy way out lumping them all into one gigantic flood, without considering all these events."

You may have missed the memo, but The Flood was more than just a Flooding. The events do fit into it.

"Plus the varves of Lake Suigetsu has 70,000 years of recorded sediments."

Varves are easily multiplied in tubulent and resettling conditions. Just because Suigetsu is calm now, it doesn't mean it didn't start out more turbulent and reshuffle varves back then.

Dudley Barnes

Meilleur contributeur

Hans-Georg Lundahl
// We don't know naturally (i e except by revelation) what happened before recorded history (which begins in Genesis 2). //

Your assuming the bible is a true record. When it is historical fiction.

The words of the bible are that of men who claim they are speaking for God. ........ There is no way to verify that, ...... it is simply hearsay and anecdotal.

OTOH *the creator's* natural laws and principles are easy to follow, forming patterns naturally, recording climate changes annually which we can rely on.

Dendrochronology, Stalagmites cores, coral cores, and even ice cores give us annual seasonal changes which all collaborate each other naturally.

// You may have missed the memo, but The Flood was more than just a Flooding. The events do fit into it. //

Only when you denied the evidence and *make it* fit.

// "Plus the varves of Lake Suigetsu has 70,000 years of recorded sediments."

Varves are easily multiplied in tubulent and resettling conditions. Just because Suigetsu is calm now, it doesn't mean it didn't start out more turbulent and reshuffle varves back then. //

This is completely false! ....... And a typical example of denying the evidence to make it fit the Noah's flood story.

You obviously do not know what a varve is, ....... and it is clearly shown in the article I posted.

Varves are couplets that are formed yearly during seasonal changes from winter to summer. Once disturbed they will not return to their original form.

Your treating them as they are just layers of the same material as in clay and shale ...... they are NOT.

The patterns that have been observed and measured say over the last 100 years *are consistent* to those going back 70,000 years. ........ This would not be the case if a major flood like Noah's ever happen, ...... it would only go back 4400 years. .........

In fact normal floods and volcanic eruptions** are also recorded in the varves (*the creators archives*) for all of us to study!

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Dudley Barnes // Your assuming the bible is a true record. When it is historical fiction.

The words of the bible are that of men who claim they are speaking for God. ........ There is no way to verify that, ...... it is simply hearsay and anecdotal. //

SOME words of the Bible are that of men who both claimed to speak for God and (usually) proved the claim with miracles.

It's in this category I place most of Genesis 1.

SOME (quite a lot) is observed events recorded by those observing and either given by them (John, Matthew), or in a later collection (Judges) or by a later editor (Genesis, Luke).

// OTOH *the creator's* natural laws and principles are easy to follow, forming patterns naturally, recording climate changes annually which we can rely on. //

In fact, no.

// Dendrochronology, //

Like the other (now usually) lignine based method, history, the further back you go, the smaller and fewer samples there are.

// Only when you denied the evidence and *make it* fit. //

Denying a piece of evidence and making a piece of evidence fit are two different operations, which is it?

// This is completely false! //

Based on what evidence? Oh, your INTERPRETATION of Lake Suigetsu ...

// And a typical example of denying the evidence to make it fit the Noah's flood story. //

Or INTERPRETING evidence I don't deny in other ways than you do ... thanks for clarifying you didn't mean actually denying anything we actually observe!

// You obviously do not know what a varve is //

I know what it looks like and I know Guy Berthault has been able to reproduce such much quicker.

// Varves are couplets that are formed yearly during seasonal changes from winter to summer //

That could be one way of interpreting things that look like that. Flower layers in Lake Suigetsu are actually a good candidate for actually being seasonal.

// Once disturbed they will not return to their original form. //

No, they will return to the lake bottom as *more* varves than previously. Not as same varves, like you rightly said. Not as fewer or as non-varves. But as *more* varves.

// The patterns that have been observed and measured say over the last 100 years *are consistent* to those going back 70,000 years. //

70,000 years would be one way of taking this consistence.

However, uniformitarian consistency is not consistent with evidence we have for non-uniformitarian events, ever so often.

// it would only go back 4400 years //

Or close to 5000. Which is what I think it does, but disturbed and reshuffled varves give the impression of 70,000 years instead.

Dudley Barnes

Meilleur contributeur

Hans-Georg Lundahl // SOME words of the Bible are that of men who both claimed to speak for God and (usually) proved the claim with miracles.

It's in this category I place most of Genesis 1. //

Claims with unnatural miracles of a supernatural god is the work of tricksters and imposter who try to fool people into thinking they have special powers and knowledge from their god. It has fooled millions.

I believe in natural miracles by the natural creator. ...... The creator does not need to go contrary to the natural laws and principles of creation to prove anything.

It's when things go opposite to the physical laws, is when one should raise their level of skepticism.

// SOME (quite a lot) is observed events recorded by those observing and either given by them (John, Matthew), or in a later collection (Judges) or by a later editor (Genesis, Luke). //

The story of Jesus is based on false premises and fake genealogies. The first 2 chapters of Matthew show that.

** Verse 1 of Matt:1 for an example, says it is a genealogy of Jesus the son of Abraham and David who apparently are the great grand fathers of God. ...... lol.

But jesus is God and doesn't need a genealogy or descendants. ........ This is pure mythology masquerading as a legal document. ........ They'd put you in goal if you tried to used that as a means to claim tax exemption.

// In fact, no. //

Yes they are !! ...... that is how we come to have all the benefits of our modern world. Because mankind has followed the natural laws and principles governing our universe and put them to use.

Dendrochronology can now be traced back 19000 years due to cross linking.

// Denying a piece of evidence and making a piece of evidence fit are two different operations, which is it? //

It is both, ..... like what you do with the varves. ....... The evidence shown the annual couplets go make 70000.

But because this conflicts with your paradigm you have to deny it. But because it is so strong of evidence you then have to try and *make it fit* by discrediting the evidence and distorting it as if it was normal layers of soil.

// Based on what evidence? Oh, your INTERPRETATION of Lake Suigetsu ... //

No, it is not an INTERPRETATION, ....... the facts have been presented and can be observed in real time year after year as the seasons change during the year. Scientists know exactly how they form.

// I know what it looks like and I know Guy Berthault has been able to reproduce such much quicker//

Sorry, but this false ....... Send me the links where he has produces varves similar to those found in Lake Suigetsu.

Guy Berthault has been able to produce layers in running water that is well know for standard sedimentation. ......... These are not standard sediments. These are sediments that form alternating through the year.

// That could be one way of interpreting things that look like that. Flower layers in Lake Suigetsu are actually a good candidate for actually being seasonal. //

No, it is the only interpretation as it is monitored each year and measured.

// No, they will return to the lake bottom as *more* varves than previously. Not as same varves, like you rightly said. Not as fewer or as non-varves. But as *more* varves. //

That lake is tranquil and quite with little or no disturbances from running water. Which makes it an ideal place to study varves.***

// 70,000 years would be one way of taking this consistence.

However, uniformitarian consistency is not consistent with evidence we have for non-uniformitarian events, ever so often.//

Every thing about the creation is uniform ...... from the leaves on trees to the growth of humans, uniform patterns are every where ....

And to deny uniformitarianism is to deny the creators natural laws and principles. Even as demonstrated in Guy Berthault sluice experiments.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Dudley Barnes Before we go on with the rest, can we take this part?

// Claims with unnatural miracles of a supernatural god is the work of tricksters and imposter who try to fool people into thinking they have special powers and knowledge from their god. It has fooled millions.
I believe in natural miracles by the natural creator. ...... The creator does not need to go contrary to the natural laws and principles of creation to prove anything.
It's when things go opposite to the physical laws, is when one should raise their level of skepticism. //

1) "Claims with unnatural miracles of a supernatural god is the work of tricksters and imposter who try to fool people into thinking they have special powers and knowledge from their god. It has fooled millions."

How do you believe a trickster makes it appear that a miracle of supernatural type was not just a historic event, but a historic event that all of the community already remembered?

2) "I believe in natural miracles by the natural creator. ...... The creator does not need to go contrary to the natural laws and principles of creation to prove anything."

Why do you consider a supernatural miracle as "contrary to natural laws"?

Any event in normal nature is the product of more than one factor, more than one law. The difference between a pen suspended at shoulder height and a pen dropping from shoulder height is not the law of gravity, but the interference or not of fingers with it.

No natural law can on its own predict the outcome, because no scientist can ever exclude the interference of something else than it. Why could God acting supernaturally not be sometimes that something else?

Besides, whether God needs or "does not need" to prove anything, depends on whether He wills us, His rational creatures, to accept some specific thing.

Since we are free, proof may be what WE need to obey Him, and therefore He would want to supply it.

3) "It's when things go opposite to the physical laws, is when one should raise their level of skepticism."

I believe that about ONE basically natural law of psychology.

a) a trickster cannot make a community recall events that no one in it ever saw happen
b) a trickster cannot make a community recall having had events from previous generations transmitted to them prior to meeting him
c) a trickster founding a community cannot hide from the community when he founded it.

To make a very simple example : if Joseph Smith founded Mormonism in 1820's and 1830's, he could not make Mormons believe they had existed at the American War of Independence. He could make them believe and did make them believe, they had pre-existed, among Nephites several centuries earlier, but he had to pretend to recover that history, he could not make them believe that was what they had remembered as they remembered George Washington.

Dudley Barnes

Meilleur contributeur

Hans-Georg Lundahl You are obviously naïve to the power of tricksters.

There have been some honest ones who have used their knowledge to expose false and misleading religious charlatans, ........ namely James Randi and today Derren Brown.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messiah_(Derren_Brown_special)

Mormonism, Islam, Judaism, and Christianity have all used super naturalism as means to verify their belief. .........

They turn to things that seem to give evidence that only a supernatural god could do. ........ Like walk on water, raise up an iron axe from the bottom of a river with the wave of a stick .......

We KNOW those things are naturally impossible, ........ So those who are ignorant are easily persuaded when that person claims he is from god.

I saw a man walk across Thames River ........ Now, I don't know how he did it, but I can assure you trickery was involved. ....... Man cannot naturally walk on water. ....... So you KNOW it is impossible. And your not fooled into believing it.

Try watching some of Derren Browns shows he answers all those questions.

here is a video of " Fear and Faith" Starts about the 52:00 mark converting atheists. You will enjoy it.

[link omitted]°

This is how you tell the truth from the false ........ Whether it is natural miracle or an unnatural one. ..........

Unnatural ones need a lot of extraordinary evidence of which there is none other that a person saying it happen. = hearsay.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Dudley Barnes "Mormonism, Islam, Judaism, and Christianity have all used super naturalism as means to verify their belief. .........

"They turn to things that seem to give evidence that only a supernatural god could do. ........ Like walk on water, raise up an iron axe from the bottom of a river with the wave of a stick ......."

In fact, Judaism as rejecting Christianity didn't do that, only pre-Christian Judaism. Which Christianity accepts as part of the own prehistory.

Islam and Mormonism also never did so. Even according to the own claims about Joseph Smith.

So, according to Christianity, only Christianity and pre-Christian Judaism should be able to show this.

What do we find? Only Christianity and pre-Christian Judaism even claim it.

"Try watching some of Derren Browns shows he answers all those questions."

I came in before the 50:00 mark, and I am not into Satanism.

Vade Retro.

Dudley Barnes

Meilleur contributeur

Hans-Georg Lundahl Yeah, Derren also exposes satanists .... lol

And everything to do with the supernatural and paranormal.

I'm free from all your superstitious blood rituals and religiosity.

And I was happy to make some of these things clear for you!

Take care neighbor ........

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Dudley Barnes Thank you very much for the kind concern, but it so happens that I haven't seen any proof of his having made any audience believe they had seen a miracle before he talked to them and he just recorded it.

Dudley Barnes

Meilleur contributeur

Hans-Georg Lundahl Yeah, correct, however, the power of suggestion can convince people to believe even if there was no agency involved. And that is basically the main reason people are fooled into believing unnatural miracles. ....... They allow their minds to be persuaded because they have a strong urge to believe in the impossible.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Dudley Barnes "however, the power of suggestion can convince people to believe even if there was no agency involved."

I know examples can exist where:

• something they see is misinterpreted as a miracle
• something that's going on in their minds can be seen as a sign from God (by the way some things in one's minds could be signs from God outside such suggestions)
• they can be enticed to believe the guy speaking to them has or naturally or supernaturally knows of people who have seen miracles elsewhere.

I do not know of any example where any group has been persuaded they recall something from earlier which wasn't there in their minds before.

Like ten people who meet for the first time cannot be persuaded they have common memories over the last ten years, and so also not their common memories involve a miracle.

Dudley Barnes

Meilleur contributeur

Hans-Georg Lundahl Your regressing from the original issue.

Basically the issue is the difference between natural miracles as opposed to unnatural miracles. ........

Unnatural miracles are employed by those claiming to have special powers or a message from god. (Derren Brown was just an example of how a person could accomplish that!)

Usually to impress their readers or listeners some form of unnatural miracle is attributed to the messenger. Supposedly this gives authority to them because only these unnatural miracles can be attributed to a supernatural god. ........

Hence, gullible sincere people are fooled into believing the story.

Walking on water and raising iron axes from the bottom of a river are unnatural miracles used as embellishments to give some authority to their story.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Dudley Barnes "Your regressing from the original issue."

No, I was all the time contesting your view of it.

"natural miracles as opposed to unnatural miracles."

Already a misnomer when you consider "supernatural" as "unnatural" ... if sth comes from the author of nature, it is never unnatural, but as He is supernatural, so can it be.

"Usually to impress their readers or listeners some form of unnatural miracle is attributed to the messenger."

You are being highly vague about what I consider the main issue.

Suppose Paul of Tarsis was no saint and he founded Christianity in the sixties in Rome. He could conceivably have got away with saying "I cured people who touched my clothes with handkerchiefs" but he could not have got away with saying "and those people ten years ago" (Haydock poses Acts 19 in 54) "formed churches that I taught" when the audience knew they were the first church he was forming.

He could also not have persuaded people back in Asia to recall they had touched his clothes with handkerchiefs and aprons and obtained cures that way, when they in fact hadn't and therefore had no such memory.

"Hence, gullible sincere people are fooled into believing the story."

The degree of gullibility YOU suppose exists, if what you say is analysed, really WOULD amount to a totally unnatural miracle of psychology. Your understanding of how gullible people work seems to be simply "they don't think like me, they believe the supernatural" ... as if being a strict naturalist preserved you from gullibility!

"used as embellishments to give some authority to their story."

You fail to analyse WHEN the story is first told with such an embellishment and HOW that relates to the supposed witnesses of the original events.

If the original audience of the embellishments are too far away, they would ask "why did we never hear this before?" - if they are too close "why don't we check?" - you pretend there is a middle ground, where it would still be recent enough for an audience to explain never hearing of it before by its being recent, but for some reason, the distance is too great to bother to check.

To return to Asia, where some saw Paul in times comparable to when they saw Peter or Andrew ... if his clothes didn't convey healing powers to handkerchiefs, why did these people not just go "WHAT???" when they came to read Acts?

It's not just that people in Rome would be able to check the claims, but people in connection with the claim would be able to check it had come to exist. If I told you "remember that time when you shook hands with Winston Churchill?" I think you would very quickly go "WHAT???" in a very similar way and very understandably so.

None of the dupes of Mohammed or Joseph Smith or momentary dupes of Derren Brown would ever have been as far duped as THAT gullibility you credit them with if they didn't.

Dudley Barnes

Meilleur contributeur

Hans-Georg Lundahl If you believe people were healed just by touching a handkerchief you admit your gullibility!

No more needs to be said!

Take care neighbor.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Dudley Barnes And you admit being gullible to the guys whose trick it is to consider acceptance of supernatural claims gullibility ...

You are free to quite the conversation.

Have a nice day.

Notes:

* Not sure all of the items in the link were reproduced correctly after getting %2 instead of %2F into / and then removing the F ...

** Most YEC myself included would consider that many of the events of the Flood were volcanic eruptions.

*** Now? Yes. Always for 70,000 years? Or otherwise after the Flood?

° Contains Satanism.