Where did the water come from, and where did it go? If it was already in the atmosphere, we couldn't breath because of the humidity. If it was in the ground, we'd be walking on quicksand. Do you know how much water would be required the cover the peaks of the himalaya's? And what about the salt water mixing with fresh water ... how would the salt-water animals survive is such dilute conditions? And don't talk about striation ... salt-water and fresh water DO mix. God does not exist.
It's funny how this story of Noah and the flood appears exactly the same as a true regional flood [Babylon] appeared in a factual story told by Gilgamesh. Then Jewish scholars many many years later adapted the story for Noah and made the flood global and suddenly involved "god" - who gave Noah the impossible task of collecting all animals and then redistributing them precisely in continents he was entirely unaware of. Look up the Epic of Gilgamesh. There was no Noah, and no global flood.
People seem to not understand how to fit the puzzle pieces together ... These Pyramids, Stonehenge, Tiwanaku and all were built in same era BEFORE the split of Pangaea Continent! Almost all ancient civilizations speak of GIANTS and a great FLOOD. The great flood wiped out the giants and split the Pangaea super continent. You can connect all the continents together. Its not myth. It proves the NOAH Flood and fallen angels who breed GIANTS! Bible is has this info. Its war of Darwin vs Truth ...
If the world-wide great flood did in fact occur ... where did all the water go? How did Noah redistribute animals evenly correctly across the entire planet? How the hell did he collect all those billions of species of land animals in the first place? How did salt-water animals survive in the fresh-water deluge? Where did all that water go!!???
What BS. If you believe this, then ... you know what you are.
There wasn't 'billions of species' when the flood happened, there was just the gineric kinds of animals. There wasnt salt water, i believe at the time of the flood, the animals were all fresh water creatures, these have evolved to cope with the salt. Note that i agree, they evolved but to a different animal within their kinds, this has been observed. No animal has ever been observed to evolve to a completely different animal? The water is still here Psalm 104 6-9 read it and learn
@ryanberry1 Oh ... so EVOLUTION did occur, but just to fit your theory's? Crap. The DNA between humans and primates are almost identical, and a lot closer than between species of dogs for instance ... fox terriers vs. dobermans. The bible is not a scientific source and cannot be taken for its word [it's a childrens fairy tale btw]. If you want to read and learn, then best you study how DNA scientists know about evolution through very clear DNA evidence - linking species together
@eatnoiseTV Yes. Yes it did, there are 6 types of evolution, only one has been observed, this is Micro, the ones that havent are Macro, Cosmic, Organic, Stellar and Chemical. I think you should have learnt some basic stuff about this before assuming that all evolution is the same. No one has ever seen a star form, Yes 95%? Which equates to 1000's of differences. And if you change just one thing will be detrimental
@ryanberry1 Mate, your ignorance is detrimental to the health of the human species. You clearly don't understand the purpose of real science or how real science works. As a religious fundamentalist, you cannot possibly begin to imagine how the real world works, and so you hide amongst your biblical fairy tales. The true nature of the universe and mother nature are amazing and complex, and much more interesting than your children's story. Search for the truth using science, not god.
@ryanberry1 And there has always been salt water. The salt is from the minerals of the earth that have been around since the earth began billions of years ago. Don't be so fundamentally ignorant. And you believe? This isn't about individual belief, it's about collective belief from hard scientific evidence. And yes, animals have been observed to evolve into completely different animals, it is called DNA evidence. Look it up.
@ryanberry1 OK, use some common sense and rational thinking. Science does not claim to know everything, it bases everything on reason, observation, measurement and mathematics - so it is in pursuit of the ultimate truth based on these criteria, and don't rely on the faulty reasoning of superstitious men 1700 years ago before the age of science.
this guy is right on! glad to see someone put several evidences in favor of creation...funny how atheists say, there's No evidence for it, waaaaa cry, here it is
@tnafguy1 I find it more than fascinating that you seem to agree with this gentleman. Perhaps it's because you don't understand the concepts at work here? That does appear to be the case. Creatards just look at one data set thru very biased eyes and say "See, this proves it!". Skeptics look at all the information and go, "not so fast". Simply put, Noah's Flood is a myth proven by examining just one little rock formation critically. Deity may exist, but Genesis is not fact. Period.
@NorthForkFisherman well said. I just believe that..well, how can fossilization occur if the 2nd law of thermo dynamics is true.... things fall apart, not the other way around...for this and many reasons i see evolution as flawed
@tnafguy1 Er, this is a discussion about a mythical flood. Exactly what does the process of fossilization have to do with this? I can see where you might want to bring thermodynamics in, but in this particular case it's the 1st Law that comes in to play and directly refutes the Genesis account. Too much heat, too little time.
@ryanberry1 Actually, it's a portion of the Opeche Shale. About 9 trillion cu meters of an evaporate deposit with certain chemical characteristics that show the flood myth to be just that. A myth!. And all it takes is basic high school chemistry and math to do so.
@ryanberry1 One is the density of chemical compounds. The other is the thermodynamic properties, such as heat of evaporation, or heat of formation. Again, this depends on the particular chemical structure of the minerals involved and how they were deposited. All of the information adds up and clearly indicates that there was no global flood. And I hope your life outside a computer includes actually learning about what you try to criticize. That would be unique for a YECer, actually.
@NorthForkFisherman Yes i call it knowing your general knowledge not 'critising'. hahaha you actually make me laugh fella. Didnt you even listen to this video? I bet you didnt even look at the actual proof, actually watch some of these.
@ryanberry1 I'd rather put a bullet in my head, as the level of damage would be exactly the same. No, I rather like having the ability to think clearly and look at such nonsense and see it for what it is. I can look at the rocks and understand what they are telling me from their chemistry and their sheer mass. In one place alone, 9 trillion cu meters of NaCl clearly shows there was no global flood.
I have no doubt that creationists are wrong in their beliefs. Take this "chemist", who talks of fossils high in the Andes of Peru, an interesting topic, but then proceeds to quote passages of text from a 2,000 year old book, as if the two are somehow connected, and bottom line is, there is too much saying otherwise, but in the eyes of the creationist, the two have to be connected, or else their grand story begins wither, and they can't have that happening, it would make them sad puppies. :(
Guys you do know they found the ark of noah in the Mounts of Ararat in Turkey.... it's been investigated and all.... and it was just like half of the arch..
I think the flood occured either around 5 thousand years ago, or 7 thousand years ago or maybe coincided with the ending of the last Ice Age arounnd 10 thousand years ago. Offcourse I think there were many many ''GREAT'' Floods before the last one was.
So, seven dudes built a boat, and fit over a billion animals, 7 pairs of all 8.7 million species, into it. I mean, come on that's shitty writing even for a fairy tale.
@SuperBspb Actually no there wasnt 8.7 million species of animals, 4000 years ago there was just the generic kinds and all the kinds that we see now have come from these initial kinds.
There are around 400 kinds of dog now; and they have come from two/four from the ark, don't think its possible do you?
Sounds more convincing than the 400 kinds of dog evolving from a rock. Yes. The ark was real. Put that in your pipe and smoke it.
@ryanberry1 Are you joking? By that logic monkeys should be have human children if you think evolution can happen that fast. Dogs are unique in that they can change genes very rapidly.Also by using the rock analogy you prove you own ignorance of the theory of evolution and are just regurgitating the same weightless argument that creationists always use. So I'd rather not smoke your logical fallacies and faulty science.
@SuperBspb no im not actually! the evolution im talking about is Micro-Evolution, this happens between the same species, a dog can produce a different type of dog but it is still a dog,we can both agree on that. No dog has ever produced a non-dog this is the same with any type of animal. You think that i believe in Marco-Evolution, when an animal changes into another species this has NEVER been observed. So tell me where do YOU think we came from? Trace it back and it will be a rock.
@ryanberry1 The dog is one of the only species that can evolve that fast, their genome allows for massive changes between offspring. There is no way that we can have the variety of species we have now in 4000 years if we started with only the basic kinds. So what your saying is that just because a dog stays a dog that there is no evolution? That is the same thing with people, we are still apes and monkeys are still apes. A Chihuahua has more physical differences from a Mastiff than us and apes.
@SuperBspb Well thats a good motto to go by, a watermelon is 95% water and a cloud is 100% water does that mean the watermelon evolved from a cloud? I'm not saying that, i agree dogs evolve but not to another species - you ignored that one. It might do, but just face it what genuine evidence is there for a millions of years old earth? none.
@ryanberry1 "what genuine evidence is there for a millions of years old earth? none."
False. There is hundreds of years of evidence yet to be disputed by anyone other that pseudo-scientific creationists. And by the way there IS definitive evidence for evolution. I'll send you a link.
@SuperBspb care to explain the rates of erosion? the fact the sun is shrinking and so would have been much bigger? the moon is moving away and so the tides, wind magnetic field would mean nothing could survive and the earth is slowing showing that the earth would be spinning way to quick millions of years ago.
To mention a few, have you even heard all of this video?
i agree with your idea of a large comet or even several comets hitting the Earth and causing the Great Flood. But I do have other ideas you might want to look into, brother. Please check out my book on manariwa dot com. Be willing to share it with you. Thanks for the video.
Salt deposits in Utah laid down by an ocean millions of years ago, all of these creations bull is easily disproved with little research ultimately creationist cannot produce any viable evidence of their claims
He is right it is a battle over the same evidance, but in how to explain that evidance, do we try to prove an ancient book, or jsut let it speek for itself.
Noahs ark,lots of videos in you tube that prove that the ark is on mountain in turkey.at the end its a matter of faith(to believe in things that can't be proved,seen.etc)their are people who want to be blind.and nothing will convince them about creation.we the believers have nothing too loose.but the atheist ?they will have to face GOD at the judgement day.
You proved that oyesters have in fact been found there. Now prove that a global flood happened, and those oyesters weren't brought there by any other means.
But let's focus on something in your supposed field, Chemistry. Saltwater and freshwater fish cannot interchangably co-exist. Hell, diluting saltwater enough with freshwater tends to kill saltwater fish. So how does mixing salt and freshwater end up allowing fish, of any kind, to live?
@crazyinsane500 There was large pocktets of saltwater and large pockets of fresh water. The waters maintained a degree of segregation. For example, there is fresh water and salt water and brackish water in very close proximity of each other such as the case near the Hudson River and where it meets the ocean near Manhattan
@DuhEnlightenedOne What you're speaking of is the mouth of the river, to which you can point to pretty much any river that pours out into the ocean. Take notice of how these are one running body of water moving to a standing body of water. Not two standing bodies of water ontop of each other, which is what the flood would lead to.
@crazyinsane500 salt water has a higher density and so any salt water fish could survive by staying towards the bottom where the salt water would be. Furthermore, it is quite possible that salt water oceans only came to be AFTER the flood. Water draining off the land and pooling into oceans would have washed salt from the land into the seas. I am not aware of evidence that says ocean were salty prior to the flood.
@DuhEnlightenedOne By staying towards the bottom these saltwater fish would be crushed by the immense pressure of the other water on top of them. Not to mention the light filtration will render them blind since unlike the bottom-dwellers they arent adapted for dark places.
Also, there is no evidence that says the ocean was freshwater either. Although we do know is that the water IS saltwater, and evidence shows it always has been. There isn't evidence of a flood though.
@crazyinsane500 there would not be immense pressure because the density of the salt water would be sufficient to support the fresh water. no one says the fish were in 20 mile deep oceans. the salt water fish could have been in 20 feet deep water. not enough to crush or blind them.
if you think there isn't evidence for a flood then why are you on a video that is titled EVIDENCE FOR NOAH'S FLOOD. Sounds like you already made your mind up, so go watch football
@DuhEnlightenedOne You do know that it wouldn't be like a little mini-ocean underneath the freshwater, right? The freshwater would block out the light and still have weight, affecting the underlying saltwater.
The evidence presented was mearly assumed. He said clams found on land proved the flood, which they do not. It mearly proves they got on land. With the same logic, finding a brick at the bottom of the ocean proves Atlantis.
@DuhEnlightenedOne There was no flood, ergo, your awareness of salinity is meaningless. And you really need to study exactly what the salts are in seawater. You want to look for the bromine content. Then we can start looking at heat and how that plays a role in disproving the flood. And we can also look at osmosis and tissues, as well.
Check for Colorado River delta on Google Maps. The delta is huge! You can see it with your own eyes. Only a creationist would make a claim that can be simply and conclusively disproven by checking the internet for two minutes.
@NorthForkFisherman why? that would be a zealot thing to do.. just pointing that its somwhat hypocritical not to mention this guy is being dishonest with what the facts actually are
@scorand LOL, I agree, but I'm just trying to mirror the mindset that looks at Genesis as literal. So if it's all literal, what's the appropriate way to deal with heretics? (cue Monty Python quotes)
If you wish to know what happended to the washed away dirt of the colorado river look up sea of Cortez and dam. Take another point away from the creationists and give it to the evolutionists.
I just love it, how Mr. Hotwind disproves creationism all by himself.
For once Mr. Hotwind is right: It is a battle about the sam evidence. With the difference, that creationists take for granted from the start, that what's written in the bible was true. (Which violates one of the basic rules of science: to be unbiased)
Psalm 104:5-9 "Who laid the foundations of the earth, that it should not be removed forever." Excellent proof, that stone age people did not know about the movement of the tectonic plates, which takes place right now.
>> "The waters stood above the mountains
Yes in a big local flood they do that sometimes. And, of course, to stone age people a big local flood seem to cover their whole world. Just listen to what the last primitive tribes on earth think to be their "whole world".
Keep up the good work. We need more outspoken and knowledgeable guys like you. When is your next conference? Where will it take place? Are you coming to LA soon? Thank you.
@Margaretfang1224 Who are you addressing? There's a great many people who frequent these laughable creations and failed attempts at justifying a worldview based on a bronze age myth. I enjoy exposing the fallacies put foward as science. It's refreshing and fun.
@aguteempasil Molecules, my dear, are central to chemistry, and as such are central to all other sciences that derive from it. Geology is based on chemistry and its processes. So also is biology. And a truely honest chemist will look on the Earth and be in agreement with the geologist and biologist. This is an ancient world with life rampant, all of which are expressions of chemistry, physics, and finally of math.
@NorthForkFisherman Gee, thanks dear, but your preaching to the chior on biomechanical processes. that comment was made because it is obvious from his stance on the "flood" that he has no understanding of geology or physics. its clear to the non-brainwashed lamen that this earth is older than 6000 years. to say otherwise is a refusal of science and the natural world as we know it. comming from a biology student, i was being sarcastic.
@aguteempasil Not meant to be insulting, but context and tone are really hard to get in only 500 chars, neh? I usually throw a html tag in like this: (/sarcasm) What I was trying to demonstrate is that so many people don't see the interrelatedness of all the sciences and how they all fit together to support the conclusions given.
Wow... Ok so flood could of happened millions of years ago and caused this and was set in stone also earthquakes can move land as well so that's why all that land went into sea. Doesn't take a genius...
Wow... Ok so flood could of happened millions of years ago and caused this and was set in stone also earthquakes can move land as well so that's why all that land went into sea. Doesn't take a genius...
Wow... Ok so flood could of happened millions of years ago and caused this and was set in stone also earthquakes can move land as well, so that's why all that land went into sea. Doesn't take a genius...
The science of Geology explains canyons. Noah's flood never happened - it is just a story. The bible is full of stories - some worth reading and some not. Noah's flood is just plain silly.
@xchris1800 Ah, if this law does kill the big bang why isn't it a bigger concept? If you would be so kind as to send me visual evidence so i know you're not just pulling shit out of your ass. :)
@sesshoin1 " Ah, if this law does kill the big bang why isn't it a bigger concept?" because thinking is painful for many, they enjoy believing in what they hear more.
"If you would be so kind as to send me visual evidence" the evidence is let's debate what you know in favor, and what I know against that ridiculous theory. my challenge to you is making you think.
@xchris1800 "...thinking is painful for many, they enjoy believing in what they hear more"
So if you enjoy what you hear/read then do exactly what it says. Don't eat shrimp or shellfish, don't cut your hair on the sides, don't wear cotton and wool, don't lie, etc. Asking how can nothing explode can be described as filling a room with flammable gases. You can't see the gas, you may not even know it's there, but if you light a match, the room will explode. The Big Bang though is a theory not law
@sesshoin1 "...you enjoy what you hear/read then do exactly what it says" that is feeling, it is not always in harmony with a good thought. sample: i like watch fights, but my thoughts tell me, that's no good. that's what i said: "thinking is painful for many", and it is really.
"The Big Bang though is a theory not law". Yes, and it doesnt even deserve to be called a sad hypotesis, and nothing cannot explode, otherwise wouldnt be nothing.
@xchris1800 So your saying that many people, whom you clearly don't know, think that the act of thinking is hard...that's like being a 5 year old in elementary school who can't do math because "it make's me think to hard!" wah wah, if you don't want to think how do you expect people to take you seriously?
If you want to disprove the Big Bang so much than prove how any of the deities of religion exist. If they created themselves then they cam from nothing, just like the Big Bang. Think about it
@sesshoin1 I said(1): ...because thinking is painful for many, they enjoy believing in what they hear more.
you said:(1)
So if you enjoy what you hear/read then do exactly what it says
I said(2): that is feeling, it is not always in harmony with a good thought. sample: i like watch fights, but my thoughts tell me, that's no good. that's what i said: "thinking is painful for many", and it is really.
you said:(2)
that's like being a 5 year old in elementary school(1)
@sesshoin1 who can't do math because "it make's me think to hard!"
Do you think i can take you seriously in a debate if you misunderstand my words from the beginning in statement(1), with your answer in in your statement(2)?
@xchris1800 I was just referring to your lack of thought. You said that thinking in general is hard for many. And I was referring that to the response little children give their teachers/parents when they don't understand anything.
@xchris1800 You misunderstand what the Big Bang theory says, and should probably just not talk about things that you don't understand, LET ALONE try to debunk them with poorly thought out sentences and horribly flawed logic.
@spiderpig85 you think because people refute your "theories" they dont "understand", nothing mystical your your theory. the Big-bang, stupidity from the beggining of the theory.
@xchris1800 You want to talk about stupidity, what about the flood story? How did the earth get covered in water? Do you realize the amount of water that would require? It is not possible.
The big bang theory says that everything in the universe was compressed into a single point of nearly infinite density. There was never 'nothing', it was in a single particle.
@spiderpig85 I think you want to speak of the theory of the big-bang, if you let me, i can start with one question to you, you know i dont believe on that, : why do you think the big-bang is possible, according to the laws of physics we know until know? I want to hear science from you.
@xchris1800 The rate of expansion and vectors at which everything is expanding. We can trace all object back on their current vectors to a single point. With basic physics and math, they come from one point. It's hard to argue with math my friend.
And these aren't MY theories. These are theories brought to you by the same people who brought you the modern world. You owe them your respect I think.
@spiderpig85 calm down my friend, i dont disagree until now with your statement, i will let you know where, we creationist think the same about what you typed, so go ahead with science, there is one point in which we change the directions of our interpretation.
@xchris1800 you think because people refute your "theories" they dont "understand", nothing mystical your your theory. the Big-bang, stupidity from the beggining of the theory.
Have a quick look around you, all that modern lifestyle, all that technology, your medicine etc ALL of it you owe science ! So if science is stupid, how come all that technology works so well ? The only thing stupid here is your argument ! Science has proven that its ideas are valid, what has creationism to show for ?
WTF are you talking about?The big bang doesnt talk about any explosion whatsoever,moron.Get at least a basic knowledge of the things you want to talk about,you make a fool of yourself ! I mean you have internet, all the iunformation you could possibl want is just a mouseklick away, yet you just pull stuff out of your ass, or instead asking a real science source you listen to creationist propaganda ! If you need advice on the bible,do you ask a biologist ?
@xchris1800 The evidence I have for you my man of science is the law of entropy which kills the fictitious big-bang theory.
BWAHAHAHAHHAHAHA Do tell how, i allways enjoy a good laugh ! You really think the big bang theory would be so widely recognized if it violated entropy ? Your arrogance is beyond any scale, you really think with your little to none knowledge abpout science you could debunk some of the smartest people on the planet ? UNFUCKINGBELIEVABLE !!!! Oh the irony !!!!!
@xchris1800 "Creation as theory is full of facts"
About as many facts as a nazi propaganda movie !! " Evolution is just trash worshipped by stupids".
You dont have the faintest idea about evolution, yet you have the audacity to act as if you could judge it better then our scientists,who are among the smartest people on the planet, and who dedicate their lifes to understand those theories. Dont you get how unbelievably arrogant you are doing that ? AT LEAST do some research on the subject
@MrRichardQED O.k, you just carry on your merry way. We'll see who's laughing in a million years time. How about that? I wonder if you'll be so cocky on your death bed.
@The1611KJV O.k, you just carry on your merry way. We'll see who's laughing in a million years time. How about that? I wonder if you'll be so cocky on your death bed.
Why wouldnt i be ? I had allways a good relationship to my gods, so i have nothing to fear.
@NorthForkFisherman It makes no difference to me if you believe Creation or not. Call me a coward but I don't have the guts to call God a liar, which is basically what you're doing. I tell you what, if you're so confident that you're right and the Bible is wrong, why don't you reply to this post and challenge God that if He exists, to give you some fatal disease like AIDS. I mean, after all, there is no God, so what do you have to worry about?
@The1611KJV I call men liars. I cannot say such things about that which may not exist. There is no proof as to the existance or non-existance of any of a number of deities; all may be correct, all may be wrong. One thing that is an absolute however, is the fact that Genesis is not literal. And I call you a liar for claiming that it is. Either that or you are criminally ignorant. And a faith based on fear rather than knowledge? That is indeed cowardly. Do you have any real evidence for anything?
@NorthForkFisherman Well like this guy in the youtube video says, all the evidence is there but you will either interpret it from an evolutionary perspective or a Creationist perspective. Like the man says - a Christian will look at the grand canyon and say - a flood must've done this. An evolutionist will say the Colorado river did this but if both dig deeper, both will realise that it could not have been a tiny river that caused the Grand Canyon and yes - you are calling God a liar, not me.
@The1611KJV I simply look at the evidence from a factual perspective. ALL OF THEM. Unlike YECers/IDiots. I don't cherry pick. And as the earth itself has no agenda, I go with what it says. Natural processes over4.54 billion years have created the earth we see. Not a mythical deluge. And if you think deity created all this, then it's a deceitful creature whatever it is.
@NorthForkFisherman Well I guess I'll be seeing you and MrJondl at the Great White Throne Judgment where you can explain everything you believe to the Almighty. By the way if millions of people disappear in an instance within your lifetime, that means you've experienced the rapture. Once this happens, the only way to get to heaven is to not take the mark of the beast, but unfortunately the One World Government will execute you if you don't take it. See you two in a million years yeah? Ha ha.
@The1611KJV And again with the Pascal's Wager. That's how you know when you've beaten a Taliban for Jebus. When they have nothing based on facts and so have to resort to threats. Pathetic. And it seems I've heard that "rapture" nonsense once before. When was it? Back in May, perhaps? How's that working out for you cats? You can go. Come back when you've got real data. Otherwise, you're bringing a butterknife to an intellectual gunfight. Bye-bye.
@NorthForkFisherman I never said it would happen last May did I?. Do you mind if I start calling you The Entertainments Manager? It's just that I'm having a ot of trouble taking you seriously. You keep going on about Pascal's wager and yet you yourself did something similar by saying a number of deities could exist, so I'm going to call your bluff. Why don't you challenge the God who inspired the book of Genesis and say 'If you really exist, strike me dead with any disease.'
@NorthForkFisherman 'a lot of trouble'. You sure talk big until your life depends on it. Come on Big Man, I've thrown down the gauntlet here. Let's see you call God's bluff - yeah the God who inspired Genesis and states clearly it was a 6 day creation. If you don't challenge God, everyone who reads this will think you're a coward and noone will take you seriously. Remember - you're only challenging the God who inspired a book you don't believe is true - Genesis.
@itsagreatday100 Hello, I just would like you to know that i took all your words to heart and appreciate your kindness and causing me to reconsider my approach. At times i let frustration and others demeanor get the best of me and my reaction is not always admirable to say the least. Again, I thank you for your shared thoughts and wish you only the best. Peace and God bless.
p.s. Lastly, i would remind you of your demeanor, ""Your bible is flawed deal with it!"-itsagreatday100
@itsagreatday100 RESPONSE 2-"Your bible is flawed deal with it!"-itsagreatday100
(I)... the chief cause of lamentation, if that had been vowed, but her virginity.
So you see dear child, when you say, "Your bible is flawed deal with it!", know now it is not the Holy Bible that is flawed but instead it is your perception of the text that is flawed and the scholars attest. Deal with it.
(H)... the daughters of Israel go to praise the daughter of Jephthah the Gileadite four days in the year. תּנּה does not mean θρηνεῖν, to lament or bewail (lxx, Chald., etc.), but to praise, as R. Tanchum and others maintain.
Wesley's Notes
11:39 Did with her - Jephthah's daughter was not sacrificed, but only devoted to perpetual virginity. This appears, From ver.37,38, where we read, that she bewailed not her death, which had been the chief cause of lamentation.. (CONTINUED)
(G)... for had he consulted Phinehas the priest, he would have redeemed her with a price.
Keil and Delitzsch Biblical Commentary on the Old Testament
At the end of two months she returned to her father again, "and he did to her the vow that he had vowed, and she knew no man." I consequence of this act of Jephthah and his daughter, "it became an ordinance (a standing custom) in Israel: from year to year (see Exodus 13:10) the daughters of Israel go to praise the...(CONTINUED)
(F)... and knew no man; and where her father supported her, and obliged her to live all her days; and so Ben Gersom - this vow of her being separated from men, and devoted to the service of God; and she knew no man; never married, but lived and died a virgin: "and it was a custom in Israel"; the Targum adds,"that a man might not offer his son or his daughter for a burnt offering, as Jephthah the Gileadite did, and did not consult Phinehas the priest; for had he...(CONTINUED)
(E) "And it came to pass at the end of two months, that she returned unto her father, who did with her according to his vow which he had vowed: and she knew no man. And it was a custom in Israel,"-Judges 11:39
Clarke's Commentary on the Bible
"And she knew no man" - She continued a virgin all the days of her life.
Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible
Kimchi and Ben Melech: he built a house for her without the city, where she dwelt alone, and knew no man; and..(CONTINUED)
(D)..and especially under the pretense of offering a pleasing sacrifice to that God who is the Father of mankind, and the Fountain of love, mercy, and compassion.
Matthew Henry's Concise Commentary
It's hard to say what Jephthah did in performance of his vow; but it is thought that he did not offer his daughter as a burnt-offering. Such a sacrifice would have been an abomination to the Lord; it is supposed she was obliged to remain unmarried, and apart from her family. (CONT)
(C)... to speak a language consistent with itself, and with the nature of God."
Those who assert that Jephthah did sacrifice his daughter, attempt to justify the opinion from the barbarous usages of those times: but in answer to this it may be justly observed, that Jephthah was now under the influence of the Spirit of God, Judges 11:29; and that Spirit could not permit him to imbrue his hands in the blood of his own child; and especially under the pretense of...(CONTINUED)
(B)... but consecrated to him in a state of perpetual virginity; for the text says, She knew no man, for this was a statute in Israel. ותהי חק בישראל vattehi chok beyishrael; viz., that persons thus dedicated or consecrated to God, should live in a state of unchangeable celibacy. Thus this celebrated place is, without violence to any part of the text, or to any proper rule of construction, cleared of all difficulty, and caused to speak a language consistent with...(CONTINUED)
@itsagreatday100 REPLY 2-"You lied dude or miss informed."-itsagreatday100
Come here child. Take my hand.
(A)Judges 11:31 "Then it shall be, that whatsoever cometh forth of the doors of my house to meet me, when I return in peace from the children of Ammon, shall surely be the LORD’s, and I will offer it up for a burnt offering."
Clarke's Commentary on the Bible
"From Judges 11:39 it appears evident that Jephthah's daughter was not Sacrificed to God, but consecrated to him in a... (CONTINUED)
@itsagreatday100 REPLY 2-"..let them ignore the fact that God accepted a human sacrifice in Judges 11:29-40,"-itsagreatday100
LET IT BE KNOWN TO EVERYONE THAT "itsagreatday100" HAS EITHER LIED OR HE HAS NO IDEA OF WHAT HE'S TALKING ABOUT, FOR NOWHERE IN JUDGES CHAPTER 11 DOES IT SPEAK OF GOD "accepting a human sacrifice".
READ IT FOR YOURSELF EVERYBODY AND DON'T TAKE "itsagreatday100"'s WORD FOR IT.
But really, I wouldn't expect anyone to take my word for it....
A simple examination of the science that studies such phenomena do a much better job of proving beyond a shadow of a doubt that the religious opinions of these people will not overturn the facts....
@itsagreatday100 REPLY 2-"Myself I am an Atheist, I left your futile faith!"-itsagreatday
Well there is still hope as it is clear to see that you have not completely crossed over to the dark side. Concerning your faith, your still on the fence. If you weren't, you wouldn't be hanging out watching these videos. Keep searching my friend and truth will find you.
@TheStalkingNight11 REPLY 2, "The God of the old testament was a cruel dictator..."-The StalkingNight
I believe this is all a matter of perspective. As you see His judgement passed on those who break His moral code which in turn may lead innocents astray as cruel, i see it as a loving act to protect those that do right by Him, for it is the world where souls will rest that is most important in this life.
Just because this guy is wearing a lab coat (or scientist costume) doesn't make him an actual scientist. He's just another young-earth creationist trying (and failing) to defend a global flood. The truth is if you do some actual research everything about the flood is impossible, unless of course it was some sort of miracle and God used magic. Better start researching local flood theory if you want the Bible to stand up to modern science and rational thinking.
@profet1001 REPLY 2-"if a lot of water did it in a short time, there would't be any curves as shown at 04:37"-profet1001
That's not necessarily true. The one thing you are not considering is that the flood plain had been completely saturated thousands of feet deep from the water that had been resting on it for about a year. The curvy areas were the least firm ground and the first to let loose when the lakes breached.
well, you probably do if you're capable of believing in a god. and of course your god is the real one.
all those muslims, jews, hindoeist, flying spaghetti monster believers, mormons, jehova's,...(who am i forgetting?) are wrong because your book says so. so sad.
@profet1001 REPLY 2-"do you really believe this nonsense?"-profet1001
Hell no i don't. You are spot on, evolution theory sure is a bunch of bunkum! Your God, is the real one too, and i am happy to hear you realize there is only One. The same One all of us, muslims, jews, hindoeist, flying believers, mormons, and jehovas pray to.
@profet1001 REPLY 2-"all those muslims, jews, hindoeist, flying spaghetti monster believers, mormons, jehova's,..(who am i forgetting?) are wrong because your book says so. so sad."-profet1001
(a) I'll tell you profet1001, you sound pretty certain of yourself and i find that interesting. What's so curious is why someone like you would be hanging out here in the first place. Watching a video on EVIDENCES Of Noah's Flood, reading the comment column, etc.. It seems to me that maybe..(CONTINUED)
(b).... that maybe your not so cock-sure of yourself. Are you carrying some uncertainty? Lingering Questions? Or possibly a bitter resentment against God? Or maybe fear of Him and that's why you'd rather He not exist? Whatever the case may be, as far as your soul is concerned, i have heard that eternity is an awful long time. While we're still above ground, all we get is this one shot. There are no "Do-overs". May God help you if your making a mistake.....
@profet1001 REPLY 2-"if a lot of water did it in a short time, there would't be any curves as shown.."-profet1001 ("Curves" a.k.a. meanders)
Point 1: Conversely, if meandering chasms and canyons, mesas, buttes, and spires were formed over millions of years by meandering streams—the “textbook” explanation—then mesas, buttes, and spires should be more evenly distributed worldwide, not disproportionally concentrated in this one basin on the Colorado Plateau.- yours truly, Mr.Obvious
@profet1001 REPLY 2-"if a lot of water did it in a short time, there would't be any curves as shown at 4:37"-profet1001
Point 2: What you are seeing in the photo at 04:37 in the video is one of the world’s most famous meandering rivers or streams called the San Juan River, which flows entirely within the basin of the former Grand Lake, what today is Goosenecks State Park contains the western hemisphere’s most extreme segment of a meandering river or stream. Why do rivers Meander? (CONTINUED)
Point 2a (cont.): Why do rivers meander, and what conditions could produce such extreme and deep meandering in a river that today is so small and sluggish?
A river flows faster on the outside of even slight bends than on the inside, just as the outside of a merry-go-round travels faster than the inside. The centrifugal force (pushing outward) raises the water level on the outside of a bend. Therefore, the river’s surface water flows toward the outside of a bend, and....(CONTINUED)
Point 2b (cont.)..and the bottom water completes the circulation by flowing toward the inside. In other words a river flows in a corkscrew (spiral) pattern around a bend.
Sediments eroded by the faster flow along the outer bank, are transported to and deposited near the inner bank where the flow is slower and less able to carry sediments. Even on rivers that are initially fairly straight, slight curves expand and meandering increases, if the flow is fast, high, and steady. (CONT.)
Point 2c (cont.)..Meanders occur on broad, flat floodplains. Deep meanders require a large floodplain with deep, loose sediments. The flow out of Grand Lake encountered a major bottleneck, slightly downstream from what is now the Goosenecks region.This bottleneck slowed the upstream flow, so sediments were dropped, but through the bottleneck the flow was rapid so sediments were scoured and the channel deepened.
After the lake emptied, subsurface water steadily drained..(CONTINUED)
POINT 2d (cont).. steadily drained into the large San Juan basin all along its 1,000+-mile perimeter, making the San Juan a powerful river for centuries, especially along the steep channel eroded down through the bottleneck and slightly beyond. This steepness, slight headward erosion back through the still loose sediments, and the high volume of water provided the considerable energy needed to excavate the meandering river’s outer banks to the extreme extent seen today. (CONTINUED)
Point 2e (cont.) Why did the Goosenecks develop such uniform and symmetrical meanders? Today, rivers are fed primarily by surface flow, so their volume flow rate, depth and sediment load are seasonal. This produces varying meander patterns. However, the early San Juan was fed largely by subsurface water steadily draining into the large San Juan basin, so centuries of fast steady flow conditions produced uniform, symmetrical meandering patterns. END
@SpencerBenedict2nd jesus fucking christ! keep it short! if i want some lessons in geography i will look it up myself. evolution theory is not a religion, it's a fact, a science that's been proven a long time ago and the proof of this theory keeps building up every day. a bible is just a book to teach you about moral values. if you take it too seriously, you're just a stupid idiot.
Evolution is not a science, but is a religion. To date, evidence only supports what is termed "micro" evolution which is speciation. Macro evolution, on the other hand, has not yey been proven. It is still only a theory, therefore it takes "belief without evidence" to subscribe to it. Hence, it is by definition, a religion based on a religious belief.
Webster’s Dictionary defines religion as follows: “Cause, principle or system of beliefs held to with ardour and faith.”
@SpencerBenedict2nd It's only delusional people like you who refuse to look at facts and rather believe in creationtheory of wich the only proof of it is written in a bible. the "bible" itself is a collection of books written over 1000 years. It is NOT the word of god but written down by humans. It's only their interpretation of god, what they understand, feel or dream about it. And 2000 years ago, people could not comprehend something like evolution. And some still don't.
@profet1001 You have every right to believe all the dis-information propaganda bunkum you have been victimized by. I won't stop you. But if you are an honest person with a sincere desire to know reality and truth in every matter in life and on earth, i can help you understand the obstacles that keep you from comprehending the historical truth of the 2348 B.C. global deluge and anything else like Noah and the ark or the conspiracy of the hoax's which perplex you and millions others.
If ANYBODY wonders about the intellect of SpencerBenedict2nd, keep in mind that he is defending the position of the RETARD in the white lab coat in this video.
Yeah the AUTO TECHNICIAN with a BS in Chemistry that is pretending to know what he is talking about.
There isn't ANYONE dumber on this planet than a Young Earth Creationist....
@odinata REPLY 2 - "There isn't ANYONE dumber on this planet than a Young Earth Creationist...."-odinta
It appears you have leanings toward Old Earth Evolution but Still On The Fence in the matter.Because if you weren't, then why else would you be searching for "Evidences of Noah's Flood"?
Where did the water come from, and where did it go? If it was already in the atmosphere, we couldn't breath because of the humidity. If it was in the ground, we'd be walking on quicksand. Do you know how much water would be required the cover the peaks of the himalaya's? And what about the salt water mixing with fresh water ... how would the salt-water animals survive is such dilute conditions? And don't talk about striation ... salt-water and fresh water DO mix. God does not exist.
eatnoiseTV 11 hours ago
It's funny how this story of Noah and the flood appears exactly the same as a true regional flood [Babylon] appeared in a factual story told by Gilgamesh. Then Jewish scholars many many years later adapted the story for Noah and made the flood global and suddenly involved "god" - who gave Noah the impossible task of collecting all animals and then redistributing them precisely in continents he was entirely unaware of. Look up the Epic of Gilgamesh. There was no Noah, and no global flood.
eatnoiseTV 11 hours ago
This has been flagged as spam show
People seem to not understand how to fit the puzzle pieces together ... These Pyramids, Stonehenge, Tiwanaku and all were built in same era BEFORE the split of Pangaea Continent! Almost all ancient civilizations speak of GIANTS and a great FLOOD. The great flood wiped out the giants and split the Pangaea super continent. You can connect all the continents together. Its not myth. It proves the NOAH Flood and fallen angels who breed GIANTS! Bible is has this info. Its war of Darwin vs Truth ...
YouTheory 1 day ago
Bahahahahaha! This guys science is incredible.
If the world-wide great flood did in fact occur ... where did all the water go? How did Noah redistribute animals evenly correctly across the entire planet? How the hell did he collect all those billions of species of land animals in the first place? How did salt-water animals survive in the fresh-water deluge? Where did all that water go!!???
What BS. If you believe this, then ... you know what you are.
eatnoiseTV 1 week ago
@eatnoiseTV
There wasn't 'billions of species' when the flood happened, there was just the gineric kinds of animals. There wasnt salt water, i believe at the time of the flood, the animals were all fresh water creatures, these have evolved to cope with the salt. Note that i agree, they evolved but to a different animal within their kinds, this has been observed. No animal has ever been observed to evolve to a completely different animal? The water is still here Psalm 104 6-9 read it and learn
ryanberry1 2 days ago in playlist Liked videos
@ryanberry1 Oh ... so EVOLUTION did occur, but just to fit your theory's? Crap. The DNA between humans and primates are almost identical, and a lot closer than between species of dogs for instance ... fox terriers vs. dobermans. The bible is not a scientific source and cannot be taken for its word [it's a childrens fairy tale btw]. If you want to read and learn, then best you study how DNA scientists know about evolution through very clear DNA evidence - linking species together
eatnoiseTV 2 days ago
@eatnoiseTV Yes. Yes it did, there are 6 types of evolution, only one has been observed, this is Micro, the ones that havent are Macro, Cosmic, Organic, Stellar and Chemical. I think you should have learnt some basic stuff about this before assuming that all evolution is the same. No one has ever seen a star form, Yes 95%? Which equates to 1000's of differences. And if you change just one thing will be detrimental
ryanberry1 17 hours ago in playlist Liked videos
@ryanberry1 Mate, your ignorance is detrimental to the health of the human species. You clearly don't understand the purpose of real science or how real science works. As a religious fundamentalist, you cannot possibly begin to imagine how the real world works, and so you hide amongst your biblical fairy tales. The true nature of the universe and mother nature are amazing and complex, and much more interesting than your children's story. Search for the truth using science, not god.
eatnoiseTV 11 hours ago
@ryanberry1 And there has always been salt water. The salt is from the minerals of the earth that have been around since the earth began billions of years ago. Don't be so fundamentally ignorant. And you believe? This isn't about individual belief, it's about collective belief from hard scientific evidence. And yes, animals have been observed to evolve into completely different animals, it is called DNA evidence. Look it up.
eatnoiseTV 2 days ago
@ryanberry1 OK, use some common sense and rational thinking. Science does not claim to know everything, it bases everything on reason, observation, measurement and mathematics - so it is in pursuit of the ultimate truth based on these criteria, and don't rely on the faulty reasoning of superstitious men 1700 years ago before the age of science.
eatnoiseTV 2 days ago
this guy is right on! glad to see someone put several evidences in favor of creation...funny how atheists say, there's No evidence for it, waaaaa cry, here it is
tnafguy1 3 weeks ago
@tnafguy1 I find it more than fascinating that you seem to agree with this gentleman. Perhaps it's because you don't understand the concepts at work here? That does appear to be the case. Creatards just look at one data set thru very biased eyes and say "See, this proves it!". Skeptics look at all the information and go, "not so fast". Simply put, Noah's Flood is a myth proven by examining just one little rock formation critically. Deity may exist, but Genesis is not fact. Period.
NorthForkFisherman 3 weeks ago
@NorthForkFisherman well said. I just believe that..well, how can fossilization occur if the 2nd law of thermo dynamics is true.... things fall apart, not the other way around...for this and many reasons i see evolution as flawed
tnafguy1 3 weeks ago
@tnafguy1 Er, this is a discussion about a mythical flood. Exactly what does the process of fossilization have to do with this? I can see where you might want to bring thermodynamics in, but in this particular case it's the 1st Law that comes in to play and directly refutes the Genesis account. Too much heat, too little time.
NorthForkFisherman 3 weeks ago
@NorthForkFisherman umm what is this 'rock formation'? the geologic collumn? please say yes!
ryanberry1 2 weeks ago in playlist Liked videos
@ryanberry1 Actually, it's a portion of the Opeche Shale. About 9 trillion cu meters of an evaporate deposit with certain chemical characteristics that show the flood myth to be just that. A myth!. And all it takes is basic high school chemistry and math to do so.
NorthForkFisherman 2 weeks ago
@NorthForkFisherman
sorry some of use have a life outside of a computer, what exactly are these 'chemical characteristics'?
ryanberry1 2 days ago in playlist Liked videos
@ryanberry1 One is the density of chemical compounds. The other is the thermodynamic properties, such as heat of evaporation, or heat of formation. Again, this depends on the particular chemical structure of the minerals involved and how they were deposited. All of the information adds up and clearly indicates that there was no global flood. And I hope your life outside a computer includes actually learning about what you try to criticize. That would be unique for a YECer, actually.
NorthForkFisherman 2 days ago
@NorthForkFisherman Yes i call it knowing your general knowledge not 'critising'. hahaha you actually make me laugh fella. Didnt you even listen to this video? I bet you didnt even look at the actual proof, actually watch some of these.
ryanberry1 19 hours ago in playlist Liked videos
@ryanberry1 I'd rather put a bullet in my head, as the level of damage would be exactly the same. No, I rather like having the ability to think clearly and look at such nonsense and see it for what it is. I can look at the rocks and understand what they are telling me from their chemistry and their sheer mass. In one place alone, 9 trillion cu meters of NaCl clearly shows there was no global flood.
NorthForkFisherman 17 hours ago
@ryanberry1 What's a matter. You got all sorts a quiet there.
NorthForkFisherman 1 week ago
all the atheists come here and rate it down, so funny. the top comments are so stupid, must of come from evotards
tnafguy1 3 weeks ago
I have no doubt that creationists are wrong in their beliefs. Take this "chemist", who talks of fossils high in the Andes of Peru, an interesting topic, but then proceeds to quote passages of text from a 2,000 year old book, as if the two are somehow connected, and bottom line is, there is too much saying otherwise, but in the eyes of the creationist, the two have to be connected, or else their grand story begins wither, and they can't have that happening, it would make them sad puppies. :(
AJRvlog 4 weeks ago
Guys you do know they found the ark of noah in the Mounts of Ararat in Turkey.... it's been investigated and all.... and it was just like half of the arch..
yoad34 1 month ago
@yoad34 There is no "ark:, as there was no flood.
NorthForkFisherman 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I think the flood occured either around 5 thousand years ago, or 7 thousand years ago or maybe coincided with the ending of the last Ice Age arounnd 10 thousand years ago. Offcourse I think there were many many ''GREAT'' Floods before the last one was.
xhemexx 1 month ago
Comment removed
xhemexx 1 month ago
Nice video
TheOnlyGHOST1015 1 month ago
So, seven dudes built a boat, and fit over a billion animals, 7 pairs of all 8.7 million species, into it. I mean, come on that's shitty writing even for a fairy tale.
SuperBspb 1 month ago
@SuperBspb Actually no there wasnt 8.7 million species of animals, 4000 years ago there was just the generic kinds and all the kinds that we see now have come from these initial kinds.
There are around 400 kinds of dog now; and they have come from two/four from the ark, don't think its possible do you?
Sounds more convincing than the 400 kinds of dog evolving from a rock. Yes. The ark was real. Put that in your pipe and smoke it.
ryanberry1 4 weeks ago in playlist Uploaded videos
@ryanberry1 Are you joking? By that logic monkeys should be have human children if you think evolution can happen that fast. Dogs are unique in that they can change genes very rapidly.Also by using the rock analogy you prove you own ignorance of the theory of evolution and are just regurgitating the same weightless argument that creationists always use. So I'd rather not smoke your logical fallacies and faulty science.
SuperBspb 4 weeks ago
@SuperBspb no im not actually! the evolution im talking about is Micro-Evolution, this happens between the same species, a dog can produce a different type of dog but it is still a dog,we can both agree on that. No dog has ever produced a non-dog this is the same with any type of animal. You think that i believe in Marco-Evolution, when an animal changes into another species this has NEVER been observed. So tell me where do YOU think we came from? Trace it back and it will be a rock.
ryanberry1 3 weeks ago
@ryanberry1 The dog is one of the only species that can evolve that fast, their genome allows for massive changes between offspring. There is no way that we can have the variety of species we have now in 4000 years if we started with only the basic kinds. So what your saying is that just because a dog stays a dog that there is no evolution? That is the same thing with people, we are still apes and monkeys are still apes. A Chihuahua has more physical differences from a Mastiff than us and apes.
SuperBspb 3 weeks ago
@SuperBspb Well thats a good motto to go by, a watermelon is 95% water and a cloud is 100% water does that mean the watermelon evolved from a cloud? I'm not saying that, i agree dogs evolve but not to another species - you ignored that one. It might do, but just face it what genuine evidence is there for a millions of years old earth? none.
ryanberry1 3 weeks ago
@ryanberry1 "what genuine evidence is there for a millions of years old earth? none."
False. There is hundreds of years of evidence yet to be disputed by anyone other that pseudo-scientific creationists. And by the way there IS definitive evidence for evolution. I'll send you a link.
SuperBspb 3 weeks ago
@SuperBspb care to explain the rates of erosion? the fact the sun is shrinking and so would have been much bigger? the moon is moving away and so the tides, wind magnetic field would mean nothing could survive and the earth is slowing showing that the earth would be spinning way to quick millions of years ago.
To mention a few, have you even heard all of this video?
ryanberry1 2 weeks ago in playlist Liked videos
i agree with your idea of a large comet or even several comets hitting the Earth and causing the Great Flood. But I do have other ideas you might want to look into, brother. Please check out my book on manariwa dot com. Be willing to share it with you. Thanks for the video.
manariwa 2 months ago
Salt deposits in Utah laid down by an ocean millions of years ago, all of these creations bull is easily disproved with little research ultimately creationist cannot produce any viable evidence of their claims
Fishingbirb 2 months ago 4
He is right it is a battle over the same evidance, but in how to explain that evidance, do we try to prove an ancient book, or jsut let it speek for itself.
CapQuacer 2 months ago
Troll
claton95 2 months ago
Noahs ark,lots of videos in you tube that prove that the ark is on mountain in turkey.at the end its a matter of faith(to believe in things that can't be proved,seen.etc)their are people who want to be blind.and nothing will convince them about creation.we the believers have nothing too loose.but the atheist ?they will have to face GOD at the judgement day.
Bznrebel 2 months ago
You proved that oyesters have in fact been found there. Now prove that a global flood happened, and those oyesters weren't brought there by any other means.
But let's focus on something in your supposed field, Chemistry. Saltwater and freshwater fish cannot interchangably co-exist. Hell, diluting saltwater enough with freshwater tends to kill saltwater fish. So how does mixing salt and freshwater end up allowing fish, of any kind, to live?
crazyinsane500 3 months ago
@crazyinsane500 There was large pocktets of saltwater and large pockets of fresh water. The waters maintained a degree of segregation. For example, there is fresh water and salt water and brackish water in very close proximity of each other such as the case near the Hudson River and where it meets the ocean near Manhattan
DuhEnlightenedOne 2 months ago in playlist More videos from truthmakesfree
@DuhEnlightenedOne What you're speaking of is the mouth of the river, to which you can point to pretty much any river that pours out into the ocean. Take notice of how these are one running body of water moving to a standing body of water. Not two standing bodies of water ontop of each other, which is what the flood would lead to.
crazyinsane500 2 months ago
@crazyinsane500 salt water has a higher density and so any salt water fish could survive by staying towards the bottom where the salt water would be. Furthermore, it is quite possible that salt water oceans only came to be AFTER the flood. Water draining off the land and pooling into oceans would have washed salt from the land into the seas. I am not aware of evidence that says ocean were salty prior to the flood.
DuhEnlightenedOne 2 months ago
@DuhEnlightenedOne By staying towards the bottom these saltwater fish would be crushed by the immense pressure of the other water on top of them. Not to mention the light filtration will render them blind since unlike the bottom-dwellers they arent adapted for dark places.
Also, there is no evidence that says the ocean was freshwater either. Although we do know is that the water IS saltwater, and evidence shows it always has been. There isn't evidence of a flood though.
crazyinsane500 2 months ago
@crazyinsane500 there would not be immense pressure because the density of the salt water would be sufficient to support the fresh water. no one says the fish were in 20 mile deep oceans. the salt water fish could have been in 20 feet deep water. not enough to crush or blind them.
if you think there isn't evidence for a flood then why are you on a video that is titled EVIDENCE FOR NOAH'S FLOOD. Sounds like you already made your mind up, so go watch football
DuhEnlightenedOne 2 months ago
@DuhEnlightenedOne You do know that it wouldn't be like a little mini-ocean underneath the freshwater, right? The freshwater would block out the light and still have weight, affecting the underlying saltwater.
The evidence presented was mearly assumed. He said clams found on land proved the flood, which they do not. It mearly proves they got on land. With the same logic, finding a brick at the bottom of the ocean proves Atlantis.
crazyinsane500 2 months ago
@DuhEnlightenedOne There was no flood, ergo, your awareness of salinity is meaningless. And you really need to study exactly what the salts are in seawater. You want to look for the bromine content. Then we can start looking at heat and how that plays a role in disproving the flood. And we can also look at osmosis and tissues, as well.
NorthForkFisherman 1 month ago
"The Colorado River has no delta."
Check for Colorado River delta on Google Maps. The delta is huge! You can see it with your own eyes. Only a creationist would make a claim that can be simply and conclusively disproven by checking the internet for two minutes.
pupsenok 3 months ago in playlist Creation vs Evolution...John Pendleton
Coo Coo!
bryanttillman 3 months ago
now we want to see some evidence! look at this picture I found on the internet! (this is off to a good start)
oddjob29 3 months ago
wow interesting vid.. using psudeo science. he must be a psudeo chemist, this would fall under alchemy by biblical standards. so hes a heritic
scorand 4 months ago
@scorand Burn him?
NorthForkFisherman 3 months ago
@NorthForkFisherman why? that would be a zealot thing to do.. just pointing that its somwhat hypocritical not to mention this guy is being dishonest with what the facts actually are
scorand 3 months ago
@scorand LOL, I agree, but I'm just trying to mirror the mindset that looks at Genesis as literal. So if it's all literal, what's the appropriate way to deal with heretics? (cue Monty Python quotes)
NorthForkFisherman 3 months ago
@NorthForkFisherman ahh i remember lol.. havent watched any of them in a while, have to dig my old movies
scorand 3 months ago
@scorand Don't forget "Life of Brian"!
NorthForkFisherman 3 months ago
Floods do what?
Sort fossils? NO
Make distinct layers? NO
Make different kinds of rock? NO
Leave a mud layer or some evidence? I guess not.
gregrutz 4 months ago in playlist Evidence of a global flood
This guy must have his psychiatrist tied up in a cupboard, he stole his white coat & then escaped from the mental institution.
ACCSESS247 4 months ago 10
If you wish to know what happended to the washed away dirt of the colorado river look up sea of Cortez and dam. Take another point away from the creationists and give it to the evolutionists.
I just love it, how Mr. Hotwind disproves creationism all by himself.
flamifer1 5 months ago 2
For once Mr. Hotwind is right: It is a battle about the sam evidence. With the difference, that creationists take for granted from the start, that what's written in the bible was true. (Which violates one of the basic rules of science: to be unbiased)
flamifer1 5 months ago
Psalm 104:5-9 "Who laid the foundations of the earth, that it should not be removed forever." Excellent proof, that stone age people did not know about the movement of the tectonic plates, which takes place right now.
>> "The waters stood above the mountains
Yes in a big local flood they do that sometimes. And, of course, to stone age people a big local flood seem to cover their whole world. Just listen to what the last primitive tribes on earth think to be their "whole world".
flamifer1 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
How painfully embarrassing.
"Evidence" for Noah's Flood? LOL.
AdmiralCoconuts 5 months ago
Keep up the good work. We need more outspoken and knowledgeable guys like you. When is your next conference? Where will it take place? Are you coming to LA soon? Thank you.
Margaretfang1224 5 months ago
@Margaretfang1224 Who are you addressing? There's a great many people who frequent these laughable creations and failed attempts at justifying a worldview based on a bronze age myth. I enjoy exposing the fallacies put foward as science. It's refreshing and fun.
NorthForkFisherman 5 months ago
This guy is retarded
Mallira2 5 months ago
what the fuck does a chemist know about anything except molecules?? this video is for tards.
aguteempasil 5 months ago
@aguteempasil Molecules, my dear, are central to chemistry, and as such are central to all other sciences that derive from it. Geology is based on chemistry and its processes. So also is biology. And a truely honest chemist will look on the Earth and be in agreement with the geologist and biologist. This is an ancient world with life rampant, all of which are expressions of chemistry, physics, and finally of math.
NorthForkFisherman 5 months ago
@NorthForkFisherman Gee, thanks dear, but your preaching to the chior on biomechanical processes. that comment was made because it is obvious from his stance on the "flood" that he has no understanding of geology or physics. its clear to the non-brainwashed lamen that this earth is older than 6000 years. to say otherwise is a refusal of science and the natural world as we know it. comming from a biology student, i was being sarcastic.
aguteempasil 5 months ago
@aguteempasil Not meant to be insulting, but context and tone are really hard to get in only 500 chars, neh? I usually throw a html tag in like this: (/sarcasm) What I was trying to demonstrate is that so many people don't see the interrelatedness of all the sciences and how they all fit together to support the conclusions given.
NorthForkFisherman 5 months ago
Comment removed
NorthForkFisherman 5 months ago
Comment removed
NorthForkFisherman 5 months ago
Comment removed
NorthForkFisherman 5 months ago
15:20
The Rainbow is the best (funniest) proof for a world wide flood.
"First the time ever, we see the rainbow, how come no one saw it before? Another indication of a world wide flood"
Wow. Please, if you're a closet atheist that wants to avoid confrontation, go out and help stop this madness.
EdGuila 5 months ago
LOL!!!
demoskunk 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Wow... Ok so flood could of happened millions of years ago and caused this and was set in stone also earthquakes can move land as well so that's why all that land went into sea. Doesn't take a genius...
ethan1581 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Wow... Ok so flood could of happened millions of years ago and caused this and was set in stone also earthquakes can move land as well so that's why all that land went into sea. Doesn't take a genius...
ethan1581 5 months ago
Wow... Ok so flood could of happened millions of years ago and caused this and was set in stone also earthquakes can move land as well, so that's why all that land went into sea. Doesn't take a genius...
ethan1581 5 months ago
This is shameful
CarlSagan6 5 months ago
Comment removed
CarlSagan6 5 months ago
The science of Geology explains canyons. Noah's flood never happened - it is just a story. The bible is full of stories - some worth reading and some not. Noah's flood is just plain silly.
MrJohndl 5 months ago
Please don't reproduce.
mitchbjones 6 months ago
Creation as theory is full of facts.
xchris1800 6 months ago
Evolution is just trash worshipped by stupids.
xchris1800 6 months ago
@xchris1800 what evidence do you have to support this?
sesshoin1 6 months ago
@sesshoin1 The evidence I have for you my man of science is the law of entropy which kills the fictitious big-bang theory.
xchris1800 6 months ago
@xchris1800 Ah, if this law does kill the big bang why isn't it a bigger concept? If you would be so kind as to send me visual evidence so i know you're not just pulling shit out of your ass. :)
sesshoin1 6 months ago
@sesshoin1 " Ah, if this law does kill the big bang why isn't it a bigger concept?" because thinking is painful for many, they enjoy believing in what they hear more.
"If you would be so kind as to send me visual evidence" the evidence is let's debate what you know in favor, and what I know against that ridiculous theory. my challenge to you is making you think.
first, of all How can nothing exploded?
xchris1800 6 months ago
@xchris1800 "...thinking is painful for many, they enjoy believing in what they hear more"
So if you enjoy what you hear/read then do exactly what it says. Don't eat shrimp or shellfish, don't cut your hair on the sides, don't wear cotton and wool, don't lie, etc. Asking how can nothing explode can be described as filling a room with flammable gases. You can't see the gas, you may not even know it's there, but if you light a match, the room will explode. The Big Bang though is a theory not law
sesshoin1 6 months ago
@sesshoin1 "...you enjoy what you hear/read then do exactly what it says" that is feeling, it is not always in harmony with a good thought. sample: i like watch fights, but my thoughts tell me, that's no good. that's what i said: "thinking is painful for many", and it is really.
"The Big Bang though is a theory not law". Yes, and it doesnt even deserve to be called a sad hypotesis, and nothing cannot explode, otherwise wouldnt be nothing.
xchris1800 6 months ago
@xchris1800 So your saying that many people, whom you clearly don't know, think that the act of thinking is hard...that's like being a 5 year old in elementary school who can't do math because "it make's me think to hard!" wah wah, if you don't want to think how do you expect people to take you seriously?
If you want to disprove the Big Bang so much than prove how any of the deities of religion exist. If they created themselves then they cam from nothing, just like the Big Bang. Think about it
sesshoin1 6 months ago
@sesshoin1 I said(1): ...because thinking is painful for many, they enjoy believing in what they hear more.
you said:(1)
So if you enjoy what you hear/read then do exactly what it says
I said(2): that is feeling, it is not always in harmony with a good thought. sample: i like watch fights, but my thoughts tell me, that's no good. that's what i said: "thinking is painful for many", and it is really.
you said:(2)
that's like being a 5 year old in elementary school(1)
xchris1800 6 months ago
@sesshoin1 who can't do math because "it make's me think to hard!"
Do you think i can take you seriously in a debate if you misunderstand my words from the beginning in statement(1), with your answer in in your statement(2)?
surely I cannot get any debate with you.
xchris1800 6 months ago
@xchris1800 I was just referring to your lack of thought. You said that thinking in general is hard for many. And I was referring that to the response little children give their teachers/parents when they don't understand anything.
sesshoin1 6 months ago
@xchris1800 You misunderstand what the Big Bang theory says, and should probably just not talk about things that you don't understand, LET ALONE try to debunk them with poorly thought out sentences and horribly flawed logic.
spiderpig85 6 months ago
@spiderpig85 you think because people refute your "theories" they dont "understand", nothing mystical your your theory. the Big-bang, stupidity from the beggining of the theory.
xchris1800 6 months ago
@xchris1800 You want to talk about stupidity, what about the flood story? How did the earth get covered in water? Do you realize the amount of water that would require? It is not possible.
The big bang theory says that everything in the universe was compressed into a single point of nearly infinite density. There was never 'nothing', it was in a single particle.
spiderpig85 6 months ago
@spiderpig85 I think you want to speak of the theory of the big-bang, if you let me, i can start with one question to you, you know i dont believe on that, : why do you think the big-bang is possible, according to the laws of physics we know until know? I want to hear science from you.
xchris1800 6 months ago
@xchris1800 The rate of expansion and vectors at which everything is expanding. We can trace all object back on their current vectors to a single point. With basic physics and math, they come from one point. It's hard to argue with math my friend.
And these aren't MY theories. These are theories brought to you by the same people who brought you the modern world. You owe them your respect I think.
spiderpig85 6 months ago
@spiderpig85 calm down my friend, i dont disagree until now with your statement, i will let you know where, we creationist think the same about what you typed, so go ahead with science, there is one point in which we change the directions of our interpretation.
xchris1800 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@xchris1800 If you agree with me, you are not a creationist.
spiderpig85 6 months ago
@xchris1800 you think because people refute your "theories" they dont "understand", nothing mystical your your theory. the Big-bang, stupidity from the beggining of the theory.
Have a quick look around you, all that modern lifestyle, all that technology, your medicine etc ALL of it you owe science ! So if science is stupid, how come all that technology works so well ? The only thing stupid here is your argument ! Science has proven that its ideas are valid, what has creationism to show for ?
MrRichardQED 6 months ago
@xchris1800 How can nothing exploded?
WTF are you talking about?The big bang doesnt talk about any explosion whatsoever,moron.Get at least a basic knowledge of the things you want to talk about,you make a fool of yourself ! I mean you have internet, all the iunformation you could possibl want is just a mouseklick away, yet you just pull stuff out of your ass, or instead asking a real science source you listen to creationist propaganda ! If you need advice on the bible,do you ask a biologist ?
MrRichardQED 6 months ago
@xchris1800 The evidence I have for you my man of science is the law of entropy which kills the fictitious big-bang theory.
BWAHAHAHAHHAHAHA Do tell how, i allways enjoy a good laugh ! You really think the big bang theory would be so widely recognized if it violated entropy ? Your arrogance is beyond any scale, you really think with your little to none knowledge abpout science you could debunk some of the smartest people on the planet ? UNFUCKINGBELIEVABLE !!!! Oh the irony !!!!!
MrRichardQED 6 months ago
Comment removed
MrRichardQED 6 months ago
@xchris1800 "Creation as theory is full of facts"
About as many facts as a nazi propaganda movie !! " Evolution is just trash worshipped by stupids".
You dont have the faintest idea about evolution, yet you have the audacity to act as if you could judge it better then our scientists,who are among the smartest people on the planet, and who dedicate their lifes to understand those theories. Dont you get how unbelievably arrogant you are doing that ? AT LEAST do some research on the subject
MrRichardQED 6 months ago
@MrRichardQED O.k, you just carry on your merry way. We'll see who's laughing in a million years time. How about that? I wonder if you'll be so cocky on your death bed.
The1611KJV 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@The1611KJV O.k, you just carry on your merry way. We'll see who's laughing in a million years time. How about that? I wonder if you'll be so cocky on your death bed.
Why wouldnt i be ? I had allways a good relationship to my gods, so i have nothing to fear.
MrRichardQED 6 months ago
@The1611KJV And of course, as they have no evidence to bring forth, the YEC falls back on on Pascal's Wager. Nice try. /sarcasm.
NorthForkFisherman 5 months ago
@NorthForkFisherman
The1611KJV 5 months ago
@NorthForkFisherman It makes no difference to me if you believe Creation or not. Call me a coward but I don't have the guts to call God a liar, which is basically what you're doing. I tell you what, if you're so confident that you're right and the Bible is wrong, why don't you reply to this post and challenge God that if He exists, to give you some fatal disease like AIDS. I mean, after all, there is no God, so what do you have to worry about?
The1611KJV 5 months ago
@The1611KJV I call men liars. I cannot say such things about that which may not exist. There is no proof as to the existance or non-existance of any of a number of deities; all may be correct, all may be wrong. One thing that is an absolute however, is the fact that Genesis is not literal. And I call you a liar for claiming that it is. Either that or you are criminally ignorant. And a faith based on fear rather than knowledge? That is indeed cowardly. Do you have any real evidence for anything?
NorthForkFisherman 5 months ago
@NorthForkFisherman Well like this guy in the youtube video says, all the evidence is there but you will either interpret it from an evolutionary perspective or a Creationist perspective. Like the man says - a Christian will look at the grand canyon and say - a flood must've done this. An evolutionist will say the Colorado river did this but if both dig deeper, both will realise that it could not have been a tiny river that caused the Grand Canyon and yes - you are calling God a liar, not me.
The1611KJV 5 months ago
@The1611KJV I simply look at the evidence from a factual perspective. ALL OF THEM. Unlike YECers/IDiots. I don't cherry pick. And as the earth itself has no agenda, I go with what it says. Natural processes over4.54 billion years have created the earth we see. Not a mythical deluge. And if you think deity created all this, then it's a deceitful creature whatever it is.
NorthForkFisherman 5 months ago
@NorthForkFisherman Well I guess I'll be seeing you and MrJondl at the Great White Throne Judgment where you can explain everything you believe to the Almighty. By the way if millions of people disappear in an instance within your lifetime, that means you've experienced the rapture. Once this happens, the only way to get to heaven is to not take the mark of the beast, but unfortunately the One World Government will execute you if you don't take it. See you two in a million years yeah? Ha ha.
The1611KJV 5 months ago
@The1611KJV And again with the Pascal's Wager. That's how you know when you've beaten a Taliban for Jebus. When they have nothing based on facts and so have to resort to threats. Pathetic. And it seems I've heard that "rapture" nonsense once before. When was it? Back in May, perhaps? How's that working out for you cats? You can go. Come back when you've got real data. Otherwise, you're bringing a butterknife to an intellectual gunfight. Bye-bye.
NorthForkFisherman 5 months ago
@NorthForkFisherman I never said it would happen last May did I?. Do you mind if I start calling you The Entertainments Manager? It's just that I'm having a ot of trouble taking you seriously. You keep going on about Pascal's wager and yet you yourself did something similar by saying a number of deities could exist, so I'm going to call your bluff. Why don't you challenge the God who inspired the book of Genesis and say 'If you really exist, strike me dead with any disease.'
The1611KJV 5 months ago
@NorthForkFisherman 'a lot of trouble'. You sure talk big until your life depends on it. Come on Big Man, I've thrown down the gauntlet here. Let's see you call God's bluff - yeah the God who inspired Genesis and states clearly it was a 6 day creation. If you don't challenge God, everyone who reads this will think you're a coward and noone will take you seriously. Remember - you're only challenging the God who inspired a book you don't believe is true - Genesis.
The1611KJV 5 months ago
DELETE it!
angryzilla 6 months ago
who put thumbs up?!
I am domb okay!
angryzilla 6 months ago
@itsagreatday100 Hello, I just would like you to know that i took all your words to heart and appreciate your kindness and causing me to reconsider my approach. At times i let frustration and others demeanor get the best of me and my reaction is not always admirable to say the least. Again, I thank you for your shared thoughts and wish you only the best. Peace and God bless.
p.s. Lastly, i would remind you of your demeanor, ""Your bible is flawed deal with it!"-itsagreatday100
SpencerBenedict2nd 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@itsagreatday100 RESPONSE 2-"Your bible is flawed deal with it!"-itsagreatday100
(I)... the chief cause of lamentation, if that had been vowed, but her virginity.
So you see dear child, when you say, "Your bible is flawed deal with it!", know now it is not the Holy Bible that is flawed but instead it is your perception of the text that is flawed and the scholars attest. Deal with it.
PEACE & GOD BLESS ALL!!
SpencerBenedict2nd 7 months ago
@itsagreatday100
(H)... the daughters of Israel go to praise the daughter of Jephthah the Gileadite four days in the year. תּנּה does not mean θρηνεῖν, to lament or bewail (lxx, Chald., etc.), but to praise, as R. Tanchum and others maintain.
Wesley's Notes
11:39 Did with her - Jephthah's daughter was not sacrificed, but only devoted to perpetual virginity. This appears, From ver.37,38, where we read, that she bewailed not her death, which had been the chief cause of lamentation.. (CONTINUED)
SpencerBenedict2nd 7 months ago
@itsagreatday100
(G)... for had he consulted Phinehas the priest, he would have redeemed her with a price.
Keil and Delitzsch Biblical Commentary on the Old Testament
At the end of two months she returned to her father again, "and he did to her the vow that he had vowed, and she knew no man." I consequence of this act of Jephthah and his daughter, "it became an ordinance (a standing custom) in Israel: from year to year (see Exodus 13:10) the daughters of Israel go to praise the...(CONTINUED)
SpencerBenedict2nd 7 months ago
@itsagreatday100
(F)... and knew no man; and where her father supported her, and obliged her to live all her days; and so Ben Gersom - this vow of her being separated from men, and devoted to the service of God; and she knew no man; never married, but lived and died a virgin: "and it was a custom in Israel"; the Targum adds,"that a man might not offer his son or his daughter for a burnt offering, as Jephthah the Gileadite did, and did not consult Phinehas the priest; for had he...(CONTINUED)
SpencerBenedict2nd 7 months ago
@itsagreatday100
(E) "And it came to pass at the end of two months, that she returned unto her father, who did with her according to his vow which he had vowed: and she knew no man. And it was a custom in Israel,"-Judges 11:39
Clarke's Commentary on the Bible
"And she knew no man" - She continued a virgin all the days of her life.
Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible
Kimchi and Ben Melech: he built a house for her without the city, where she dwelt alone, and knew no man; and..(CONTINUED)
SpencerBenedict2nd 7 months ago
@itsagreatday100
(D)..and especially under the pretense of offering a pleasing sacrifice to that God who is the Father of mankind, and the Fountain of love, mercy, and compassion.
Matthew Henry's Concise Commentary
It's hard to say what Jephthah did in performance of his vow; but it is thought that he did not offer his daughter as a burnt-offering. Such a sacrifice would have been an abomination to the Lord; it is supposed she was obliged to remain unmarried, and apart from her family. (CONT)
SpencerBenedict2nd 7 months ago
@itsagreatday100
(C)... to speak a language consistent with itself, and with the nature of God."
Those who assert that Jephthah did sacrifice his daughter, attempt to justify the opinion from the barbarous usages of those times: but in answer to this it may be justly observed, that Jephthah was now under the influence of the Spirit of God, Judges 11:29; and that Spirit could not permit him to imbrue his hands in the blood of his own child; and especially under the pretense of...(CONTINUED)
SpencerBenedict2nd 7 months ago
@itsagreatday100
(B)... but consecrated to him in a state of perpetual virginity; for the text says, She knew no man, for this was a statute in Israel. ותהי חק בישראל vattehi chok beyishrael; viz., that persons thus dedicated or consecrated to God, should live in a state of unchangeable celibacy. Thus this celebrated place is, without violence to any part of the text, or to any proper rule of construction, cleared of all difficulty, and caused to speak a language consistent with...(CONTINUED)
SpencerBenedict2nd 7 months ago
@itsagreatday100 REPLY 2-"You lied dude or miss informed."-itsagreatday100
Come here child. Take my hand.
(A)Judges 11:31 "Then it shall be, that whatsoever cometh forth of the doors of my house to meet me, when I return in peace from the children of Ammon, shall surely be the LORD’s, and I will offer it up for a burnt offering."
Clarke's Commentary on the Bible
"From Judges 11:39 it appears evident that Jephthah's daughter was not Sacrificed to God, but consecrated to him in a... (CONTINUED)
SpencerBenedict2nd 7 months ago
@itsagreatday100 REPLY 2-"..let them ignore the fact that God accepted a human sacrifice in Judges 11:29-40,"-itsagreatday100
LET IT BE KNOWN TO EVERYONE THAT "itsagreatday100" HAS EITHER LIED OR HE HAS NO IDEA OF WHAT HE'S TALKING ABOUT, FOR NOWHERE IN JUDGES CHAPTER 11 DOES IT SPEAK OF GOD "accepting a human sacrifice".
READ IT FOR YOURSELF EVERYBODY AND DON'T TAKE "itsagreatday100"'s WORD FOR IT.
PEACE & GOD BLESS ALL!!
SpencerBenedict2nd 7 months ago
A creationist chemist trying his luck at geology. Facepalm.
superwowie111 7 months ago
Just asserting something doesn't make it the truth.
"GOOGLE NAZI UFO'S IF YOU"RE INTERESTED IN THE TRUTH!"
You'll find plenty of other losers who don't know the truth when it bites them in the ass....
odinata 7 months ago
But really, I wouldn't expect anyone to take my word for it....
A simple examination of the science that studies such phenomena do a much better job of proving beyond a shadow of a doubt that the religious opinions of these people will not overturn the facts....
odinata 7 months ago
@itsagreatday100 REPLY 2-"Myself I am an Atheist, I left your futile faith!"-itsagreatday
Well there is still hope as it is clear to see that you have not completely crossed over to the dark side. Concerning your faith, your still on the fence. If you weren't, you wouldn't be hanging out watching these videos. Keep searching my friend and truth will find you.
PEACE & GOD BLESS ALL !!
SpencerBenedict2nd 7 months ago
@TheStalkingNight11 REPLY 2, "The God of the old testament was a cruel dictator..."-The StalkingNight
I believe this is all a matter of perspective. As you see His judgement passed on those who break His moral code which in turn may lead innocents astray as cruel, i see it as a loving act to protect those that do right by Him, for it is the world where souls will rest that is most important in this life.
Where will your soul come to rest?
PEACE & GOD BLESS ALL!!
SpencerBenedict2nd 7 months ago
Just because this guy is wearing a lab coat (or scientist costume) doesn't make him an actual scientist. He's just another young-earth creationist trying (and failing) to defend a global flood. The truth is if you do some actual research everything about the flood is impossible, unless of course it was some sort of miracle and God used magic. Better start researching local flood theory if you want the Bible to stand up to modern science and rational thinking.
carlsm95 7 months ago
@carlsm95 you know people like you make me laugh when the subject of god
comes up everyone is lying people like you say oh there no god everyone is lying
the archealogists are lying the scientists are lying oh the this guys in this video
lying cut the crap you just want a god to excist tell the truth you don't want a god
to excist because he would have have power over your life
TheStrawbeery 6 months ago
"Now, as we study the Geerography...."
05:11
odinata 7 months ago
if a lot of water did it in a short time, there would't be any curves as shown at 04:37
profet1001 7 months ago
@profet1001 REPLY 2-"if a lot of water did it in a short time, there would't be any curves as shown at 04:37"-profet1001
That's not necessarily true. The one thing you are not considering is that the flood plain had been completely saturated thousands of feet deep from the water that had been resting on it for about a year. The curvy areas were the least firm ground and the first to let loose when the lakes breached.
GOOGLE: MT ST HELENS Mudslide LITTLE GRAND CANYON
PEACE & GOD BLESS ALL !!
SpencerBenedict2nd 7 months ago
@SpencerBenedict2nd do you really believe this nonsense?
well, you probably do if you're capable of believing in a god. and of course your god is the real one.
all those muslims, jews, hindoeist, flying spaghetti monster believers, mormons, jehova's,...(who am i forgetting?) are wrong because your book says so. so sad.
profet1001 6 months ago
@profet1001 REPLY 2-"do you really believe this nonsense?"-profet1001
Hell no i don't. You are spot on, evolution theory sure is a bunch of bunkum! Your God, is the real one too, and i am happy to hear you realize there is only One. The same One all of us, muslims, jews, hindoeist, flying believers, mormons, and jehovas pray to.
PEACE & GOD BLESS ALL!!
SpencerBenedict2nd 6 months ago
@profet1001 REPLY 2-"all those muslims, jews, hindoeist, flying spaghetti monster believers, mormons, jehova's,..(who am i forgetting?) are wrong because your book says so. so sad."-profet1001
(a) I'll tell you profet1001, you sound pretty certain of yourself and i find that interesting. What's so curious is why someone like you would be hanging out here in the first place. Watching a video on EVIDENCES Of Noah's Flood, reading the comment column, etc.. It seems to me that maybe..(CONTINUED)
SpencerBenedict2nd 6 months ago
@profet1001
(b).... that maybe your not so cock-sure of yourself. Are you carrying some uncertainty? Lingering Questions? Or possibly a bitter resentment against God? Or maybe fear of Him and that's why you'd rather He not exist? Whatever the case may be, as far as your soul is concerned, i have heard that eternity is an awful long time. While we're still above ground, all we get is this one shot. There are no "Do-overs". May God help you if your making a mistake.....
PEACE & GOD BLESS ALL!!
SpencerBenedict2nd 6 months ago
@profet1001 REPLY 2-"if a lot of water did it in a short time, there would't be any curves as shown.."-profet1001 ("Curves" a.k.a. meanders)
Point 1: Conversely, if meandering chasms and canyons, mesas, buttes, and spires were formed over millions of years by meandering streams—the “textbook” explanation—then mesas, buttes, and spires should be more evenly distributed worldwide, not disproportionally concentrated in this one basin on the Colorado Plateau.- yours truly, Mr.Obvious
(CONTINUED)
SpencerBenedict2nd 6 months ago
@profet1001 REPLY 2-"if a lot of water did it in a short time, there would't be any curves as shown at 4:37"-profet1001
Point 2: What you are seeing in the photo at 04:37 in the video is one of the world’s most famous meandering rivers or streams called the San Juan River, which flows entirely within the basin of the former Grand Lake, what today is Goosenecks State Park contains the western hemisphere’s most extreme segment of a meandering river or stream. Why do rivers Meander? (CONTINUED)
SpencerBenedict2nd 6 months ago
@profet1001
Point 2a (cont.): Why do rivers meander, and what conditions could produce such extreme and deep meandering in a river that today is so small and sluggish?
A river flows faster on the outside of even slight bends than on the inside, just as the outside of a merry-go-round travels faster than the inside. The centrifugal force (pushing outward) raises the water level on the outside of a bend. Therefore, the river’s surface water flows toward the outside of a bend, and....(CONTINUED)
SpencerBenedict2nd 6 months ago
@profet1001
Point 2b (cont.)..and the bottom water completes the circulation by flowing toward the inside. In other words a river flows in a corkscrew (spiral) pattern around a bend.
Sediments eroded by the faster flow along the outer bank, are transported to and deposited near the inner bank where the flow is slower and less able to carry sediments. Even on rivers that are initially fairly straight, slight curves expand and meandering increases, if the flow is fast, high, and steady. (CONT.)
SpencerBenedict2nd 6 months ago
@profet1001
Point 2c (cont.)..Meanders occur on broad, flat floodplains. Deep meanders require a large floodplain with deep, loose sediments. The flow out of Grand Lake encountered a major bottleneck, slightly downstream from what is now the Goosenecks region.This bottleneck slowed the upstream flow, so sediments were dropped, but through the bottleneck the flow was rapid so sediments were scoured and the channel deepened.
After the lake emptied, subsurface water steadily drained..(CONTINUED)
SpencerBenedict2nd 6 months ago
@profet1001
POINT 2d (cont).. steadily drained into the large San Juan basin all along its 1,000+-mile perimeter, making the San Juan a powerful river for centuries, especially along the steep channel eroded down through the bottleneck and slightly beyond. This steepness, slight headward erosion back through the still loose sediments, and the high volume of water provided the considerable energy needed to excavate the meandering river’s outer banks to the extreme extent seen today. (CONTINUED)
SpencerBenedict2nd 6 months ago
@profet1001
Point 2e (cont.) Why did the Goosenecks develop such uniform and symmetrical meanders? Today, rivers are fed primarily by surface flow, so their volume flow rate, depth and sediment load are seasonal. This produces varying meander patterns. However, the early San Juan was fed largely by subsurface water steadily draining into the large San Juan basin, so centuries of fast steady flow conditions produced uniform, symmetrical meandering patterns. END
Yours truly, Mr. (not so) Obvious
SpencerBenedict2nd 6 months ago
@SpencerBenedict2nd jesus fucking christ! keep it short! if i want some lessons in geography i will look it up myself. evolution theory is not a religion, it's a fact, a science that's been proven a long time ago and the proof of this theory keeps building up every day. a bible is just a book to teach you about moral values. if you take it too seriously, you're just a stupid idiot.
profet1001 6 months ago
Evolution is not a science, but is a religion. To date, evidence only supports what is termed "micro" evolution which is speciation. Macro evolution, on the other hand, has not yey been proven. It is still only a theory, therefore it takes "belief without evidence" to subscribe to it. Hence, it is by definition, a religion based on a religious belief.
Webster’s Dictionary defines religion as follows: “Cause, principle or system of beliefs held to with ardour and faith.”
SpencerBenedict2nd 6 months ago
@SpencerBenedict2nd It's only delusional people like you who refuse to look at facts and rather believe in creationtheory of wich the only proof of it is written in a bible. the "bible" itself is a collection of books written over 1000 years. It is NOT the word of god but written down by humans. It's only their interpretation of god, what they understand, feel or dream about it. And 2000 years ago, people could not comprehend something like evolution. And some still don't.
profet1001 6 months ago
@profet1001 You have every right to believe all the dis-information propaganda bunkum you have been victimized by. I won't stop you. But if you are an honest person with a sincere desire to know reality and truth in every matter in life and on earth, i can help you understand the obstacles that keep you from comprehending the historical truth of the 2348 B.C. global deluge and anything else like Noah and the ark or the conspiracy of the hoax's which perplex you and millions others.
SpencerBenedict2nd 6 months ago
The false DOGMA of the Evangelical JIHADIST is what really makes one look foolish....
odinata 7 months ago
If ANYBODY wonders about the intellect of SpencerBenedict2nd, keep in mind that he is defending the position of the RETARD in the white lab coat in this video.
Yeah the AUTO TECHNICIAN with a BS in Chemistry that is pretending to know what he is talking about.
There isn't ANYONE dumber on this planet than a Young Earth Creationist....
odinata 7 months ago
@odinata REPLY 2 - "There isn't ANYONE dumber on this planet than a Young Earth Creationist...."-odinta
It appears you have leanings toward Old Earth Evolution but Still On The Fence in the matter.Because if you weren't, then why else would you be searching for "Evidences of Noah's Flood"?
Keep searching friend and Truth will find you!
PEACE & GOD BLESS ALL !!
SpencerBenedict2nd 7 months ago