Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I don’t believe it would have raised the sea level. It wasn’t the sea level rise that caused the flooding. It was the runoff of the rain that caused the flooding. Just as all other floods do. Too much rain over too short of a period is what causes floods.Assuming everything you said about the event actually happened, and the vapor fell as rain, how much do you think it would have raised the global sea level? 1 foot, 100 feet, 10,000 feet? Even if it were 10,000 feet there are large portions of the earth that would not have been submerged.Where do you believe the water vapor went?
“...The resulting explosion packed the energy of 700 1-megaton nuclear bombs, and even an observer hundreds of kilometers away would have experienced a buffeting shock wave, a monstrous thunder-clap, and hurricane-force winds...”False, as was made clear when I posted the quote from the article that was the source of the number.Sure it did.
Ding, why are you like this?
Biblical tales and fables are clearly allegorical at best, superstitions more often than not.Massive crater under Greenland’s ice points to climate-altering impact in the time of humans
Is it possible that the allegorical account of a great flood, which all ancient cultures have, is true?
What are you proposing -- a giant tsunami or wave from a large asteroid?
First, Genesis cannot be allegorical. If it was, then we would not be able to come up with a biblical timeline and events. God did not create humans from a cell. What is allegorical in the Bible are the prophecies. What does it mean because of the confusion? It means many Christians will be misled.
As for your article, you'll have to explain how it caused a great flood. It has nothing to do with a global flood. All you are claiming is a great flood. Do you mean a local flood?
They are wrong.
No, we're not. It's you who are wrong.
The creation science theories cannot change while yours keep changing. (I don't have any problems with that tho.)
Furthermore, your science eliminated creation scientists from peer reviews and it is the creation scientists who founded science and the scientific method. The laws of nature you use are from them.
Such floods usually occur in flat, low-lying areas, floodplains. It's hard to envision a scenario where ALL living animals are destroyed.I don’t believe it would have raised the sea level. It wasn’t the sea level rise that caused the flooding. It was the runoff of the rain that caused the flooding. Just as all other floods do. Too much rain over too short of a period is what causes floods.Assuming everything you said about the event actually happened, and the vapor fell as rain, how much do you think it would have raised the global sea level? 1 foot, 100 feet, 10,000 feet? Even if it were 10,000 feet there are large portions of the earth that would not have been submerged.Where do you believe the water vapor went?
Biblical tales and fables are clearly allegorical at best, superstitions more often than not.Massive crater under Greenland’s ice points to climate-altering impact in the time of humans
Is it possible that the allegorical account of a great flood, which all ancient cultures have, is true?
What are you proposing -- a giant tsunami or wave from a large asteroid?
First, Genesis cannot be allegorical. If it was, then we would not be able to come up with a biblical timeline and events. God did not create humans from a cell. What is allegorical in the Bible are the prophecies. What does it mean because of the confusion? It means many Christians will be misled.
As for your article, you'll have to explain how it caused a great flood. It has nothing to do with a global flood. All you are claiming is a great flood. Do you mean a local flood?
They are wrong.
No, we're not. It's you who are wrong.
The creation science theories cannot change while yours keep changing. (I don't have any problems with that tho.)
Furthermore, your science eliminated creation scientists from peer reviews and it is the creation scientists who founded science and the scientific method. The laws of nature you use are from them.
Fundamentalist christians falsely claiming to be "ID'iot creation scientists" never founded science and have eliminated themselves from the relevant sciences due to their own failure to be objective and to abide by the rigors of the Scientific Method.
From creation.com ministries
About Us
First time here? About Creation Ministries International
- Our Motto: Proclaiming the truth and authority of the Bible
- Our Vision: To see the Lord Jesus Christ honoured as Creator and Saviour of the world
- Our Mission: To support the effective proclamation of the Gospel by providing credible answers that affirm the reliability of the Bible, in particular its Genesis history
Did you miss the part where "ministries" is a part of their title?
“...The resulting explosion packed the energy of 700 1-megaton nuclear bombs, and even an observer hundreds of kilometers away would have experienced a buffeting shock wave, a monstrous thunder-clap, and hurricane-force winds...”
“...The impact would have melted 1500 gigatons of ice, the team estimates—about as much ice as Antarctica has lost because of global warming in the past decade...”
it just goes to show you didn’t even read the article.
Massive crater under Greenland’s ice points to climate-altering impact in the time of humans
Science does not backup the Bible. In fact it eviscerates the Bible.Biblical tales and fables are clearly allegorical at best, superstitions more often than not.Massive crater under Greenland’s ice points to climate-altering impact in the time of humans
Is it possible that the allegorical account of a great flood, which all ancient cultures have, is true?
What are you proposing -- a giant tsunami or wave from a large asteroid?
First, Genesis cannot be allegorical. If it was, then we would not be able to come up with a biblical timeline and events. God did not create humans from a cell. What is allegorical in the Bible are the prophecies. What does it mean because of the confusion? It means many Christians will be misled.
As for your article, you'll have to explain how it caused a great flood. It has nothing to do with a global flood. All you are claiming is a great flood. Do you mean a local flood?
They are wrong.
No, we're not. It's you who are wrong.
The creation science theories cannot change while yours keep changing. (I don't have any problems with that tho.)
Furthermore, your science eliminated creation scientists from peer reviews and it is the creation scientists who founded science and the scientific method. The laws of nature you use are from them.
Fundamentalist christians falsely claiming to be "ID'iot creation scientists" never founded science and have eliminated themselves from the relevant sciences due to their own failure to be objective and to abide by the rigors of the Scientific Method.
From creation.com ministries
About Us
First time here? About Creation Ministries International
- Our Motto: Proclaiming the truth and authority of the Bible
- Our Vision: To see the Lord Jesus Christ honoured as Creator and Saviour of the world
- Our Mission: To support the effective proclamation of the Gospel by providing credible answers that affirm the reliability of the Bible, in particular its Genesis history
Did you miss the part where "ministries" is a part of their title?
You should take your own postings of CMI to heart. The Bible is not a science book, but science backs up the Bible. If we are here because of creation, then our savior is Jesus. As for me, it may be better to just discuss creation science with the believers. There are many who have been misled by Satan's Antibible. The atheists seem like a lost cause. Good luck.
Such floods usually occur in flat, low-lying areas, floodplains. It's hard to envision a scenario where ALL living animals are destroyed.
ding claimed the water fell as rain so I'd think the warning would have been enough for, at least SOME people to make it to higher ground. You're talking a global event here. There were likely people living on the Tibetan plateau, the Rockies, etc. In Norway or Alaska you'd think it would snow not rain.Such floods usually occur in flat, low-lying areas, floodplains. It's hard to envision a scenario where ALL living animals are destroyed.
Take a swing through the Channeled Scablands in Eastern Washington State some time ... that would make it easier to envision such a scenario ... this is dry desert country so all the features of these floods have not been eroded away as they would be elsewhere ... human settlements are along the river, not on the hilltops, these folks would have had minutes to escape hundreds of feet of water moving fast ...
Again... an allegorical account that happened thousands of years before it was recorded in writing.Such floods usually occur in flat, low-lying areas, floodplains. It's hard to envision a scenario where ALL living animals are destroyed.I don’t believe it would have raised the sea level. It wasn’t the sea level rise that caused the flooding. It was the runoff of the rain that caused the flooding. Just as all other floods do. Too much rain over too short of a period is what causes floods.Assuming everything you said about the event actually happened, and the vapor fell as rain, how much do you think it would have raised the global sea level? 1 foot, 100 feet, 10,000 feet? Even if it were 10,000 feet there are large portions of the earth that would not have been submerged.Where do you believe the water vapor went?
You do realize you can do some math on this, right?“...The resulting explosion packed the energy of 700 1-megaton nuclear bombs, and even an observer hundreds of kilometers away would have experienced a buffeting shock wave, a monstrous thunder-clap, and hurricane-force winds...”
“...The impact would have melted 1500 gigatons of ice, the team estimates—about as much ice as Antarctica has lost because of global warming in the past decade...”
it just goes to show you didn’t even read the article.
Massive crater under Greenland’s ice points to climate-altering impact in the time of humans
Yeah ... as soon as the article insulted my integrity, I quit reading ... you need to take a deep breath and focus a bit on what you're saying ... from now on, I'd like for you to start being suspicious of sources that use "megatons of TNT" as their unit of measure ... so often that's used to deceive the reader ... as it is in this case ...
"700 1-megaton bombs" is an obvious deceit ... yes, our bombs can be dialed back to 1 megaton, but their maximum yield is 10 megaton ... the largest bomb was 50 megaton, videos can be found by searching "tzar bomb" ... so why not use that?, 14 tzar bombs worth of energy ...
Next problem is 8th grade math ... if all the energy released by these 700 1 megaton bombs was used to vaporize ice ... we'd only melt 1 gigaton, not the crazy stupid 1,500 gigatons your article is claiming ... that was obvious at first glance ... I can forgive you not appreciating how much energy it takes to vaporize ice, fair to say 2,600 J/g is enormous?, hate to use the weasel word, but that's the number we're dividing by ... thus enormous eh? ...
For homework ... I want you to use the density of water and calculate the volume that 1,500 gigatons would occupy ... then divide by the surface area of the world's ocean ... this should give you sea level rise this past decade from Antarctic melt only ... remember, we've only measured an inch, so please tell me how many kilometers your calculations differ from this measured value ...
Haven't even started on the physics mistakes ...
Great. Show your math. I’d love to see it.Next problem is 8th grade math ... if all the energy released by these 700 1 megaton bombs was used to vaporize ice ... we'd only melt 1 gigaton, not the crazy stupid 1,500 gigatons your article is claiming ...
You are questioning the allegorical account not the science of an asteroid strike in a polar region.ding claimed the water fell as rain so I'd think the warning would have been enough for, at least SOME people to make it to higher ground. You're talking a global event here. There were likely people living on the Tibetan plateau, the Rockies, etc. In Norway or Alaska you'd think it would snow not rain.Such floods usually occur in flat, low-lying areas, floodplains. It's hard to envision a scenario where ALL living animals are destroyed.
Take a swing through the Channeled Scablands in Eastern Washington State some time ... that would make it easier to envision such a scenario ... this is dry desert country so all the features of these floods have not been eroded away as they would be elsewhere ... human settlements are along the river, not on the hilltops, these folks would have had minutes to escape hundreds of feet of water moving fast ...
Claimed it fell as rain?ding claimed the water fell as rain so I'd think the warning would have been enough for, at least SOME people to make it to higher ground. You're talking a global event here. There were likely people living on the Tibetan plateau, the Rockies, etc. In Norway or Alaska you'd think it would snow not rain.Such floods usually occur in flat, low-lying areas, floodplains. It's hard to envision a scenario where ALL living animals are destroyed.
Take a swing through the Channeled Scablands in Eastern Washington State some time ... that would make it easier to envision such a scenario ... this is dry desert country so all the features of these floods have not been eroded away as they would be elsewhere ... human settlements are along the river, not on the hilltops, these folks would have had minutes to escape hundreds of feet of water moving fast ...
Different topic. I’ll make a different thread on it.Science does not backup the Bible. In fact it eviscerates the Bible.Biblical tales and fables are clearly allegorical at best, superstitions more often than not.Massive crater under Greenland’s ice points to climate-altering impact in the time of humans
Is it possible that the allegorical account of a great flood, which all ancient cultures have, is true?
What are you proposing -- a giant tsunami or wave from a large asteroid?
First, Genesis cannot be allegorical. If it was, then we would not be able to come up with a biblical timeline and events. God did not create humans from a cell. What is allegorical in the Bible are the prophecies. What does it mean because of the confusion? It means many Christians will be misled.
As for your article, you'll have to explain how it caused a great flood. It has nothing to do with a global flood. All you are claiming is a great flood. Do you mean a local flood?
They are wrong.
No, we're not. It's you who are wrong.
The creation science theories cannot change while yours keep changing. (I don't have any problems with that tho.)
Furthermore, your science eliminated creation scientists from peer reviews and it is the creation scientists who founded science and the scientific method. The laws of nature you use are from them.
Fundamentalist christians falsely claiming to be "ID'iot creation scientists" never founded science and have eliminated themselves from the relevant sciences due to their own failure to be objective and to abide by the rigors of the Scientific Method.
From creation.com ministries
About Us
First time here? About Creation Ministries International
- Our Motto: Proclaiming the truth and authority of the Bible
- Our Vision: To see the Lord Jesus Christ honoured as Creator and Saviour of the world
- Our Mission: To support the effective proclamation of the Gospel by providing credible answers that affirm the reliability of the Bible, in particular its Genesis history
Did you miss the part where "ministries" is a part of their title?
You should take your own postings of CMI to heart. The Bible is not a science book, but science backs up the Bible. If we are here because of creation, then our savior is Jesus. As for me, it may be better to just discuss creation science with the believers. There are many who have been misled by Satan's Antibible. The atheists seem like a lost cause. Good luck.
You're correct that atheists are a lost cause. If they believed the Bible, they wouldn't be atheists.
ding claimed the water fell as rain so I'd think the warning would have been enough for, at least SOME people to make it to higher ground. You're talking a global event here. There were likely people living on the Tibetan plateau, the Rockies, etc. In Norway or Alaska you'd think it would snow not rain.
Im not claiming it raised the sea level. In fact I said I didn’t believe it did because I have done the math. It’s a big volume but the surface area of the earth is a bigger number.For homework ... I want you to use the density of water and calculate the volume that 1,500 gigatons would occupy ... then divide by the surface area of the world's ocean
Actually I believe they are claiming it resulted in a cooling of the planet because the increased water vapor reduced the energy reaching the surface of the planet.ding claimed the water fell as rain so I'd think the warning would have been enough for, at least SOME people to make it to higher ground. You're talking a global event here. There were likely people living on the Tibetan plateau, the Rockies, etc. In Norway or Alaska you'd think it would snow not rain.
That's moving into the physics mistakes ... only a tiny portion of this energy would be needed to raise the atmosphere's temperature to over 100ºC ... water vapor would not condense or deposit in this environment ... with 30 to 50% water vapor content in the atmosphere, we'd see a greatly increased greenhouse effect ... the energy would bleed off slowly causing a mist or drizzle worldwide ...
1,500 gigatons of ice vaporizing ... just think about that for a few minutes ...
Great. Show your math. I’d love to see it.Next problem is 8th grade math ... if all the energy released by these 700 1 megaton bombs was used to vaporize ice ... we'd only melt 1 gigaton, not the crazy stupid 1,500 gigatons your article is claiming ...
You seem to be arguing both sides here, that the Bible is historically and scientifically accurate AND that it is allegorical. I can't be both so which is it?Again... an allegorical account that happened thousands of years before it was recorded in writing.Such floods usually occur in flat, low-lying areas, floodplains. It's hard to envision a scenario where ALL living animals are destroyed.I don’t believe it would have raised the sea level. It wasn’t the sea level rise that caused the flooding. It was the runoff of the rain that caused the flooding. Just as all other floods do. Too much rain over too short of a period is what causes floods.Assuming everything you said about the event actually happened, and the vapor fell as rain, how much do you think it would have raised the global sea level? 1 foot, 100 feet, 10,000 feet? Even if it were 10,000 feet there are large portions of the earth that would not have been submerged.Where do you believe the water vapor went?
