Noah's Ark

Originally posted by KellyJay
Have you seen the Grand Canyon and the river in it, you see any
other river on the planet with canyons of equal size around them?
Why don't all the rivers have canyons of greater or equal size around
them?
Kelly

could you post some dimensions and while youre at it: consider that any disparity with other canyons might be due to it being the youngest so the walls have been a shorter period of erosion .

Originally posted by KellyJay
Okay, I agree if the conditions were the same, but with rivers are
not all rivers eating away at all around them? I can see the Grand
Canyon occuring because of major event because of the special
conditions at that place that are not the same else where. To say
that the river did it, and have major rivers else where without such
large canyons makes me think rivers may not have as much to do
with it as some think.
Kelly

If river A made a canyon a long time ago, erosion could have reduced the size of it, or an earthquake or some other process.
If river B's canyon is younger, and nothing happened to erode or reduce the canyon, we would see it as larger.
River C? It's trying to cut a canyon, but never really gets going because the land is shifting, maybe plate tectonics, something like that.
I think that the differences we see are evidence of different conditions widely seperated in time rather than a one-time event which would have entailed identical conditions.

Originally posted by KellyJay
Hey you have my respect, many would simply not respond and not
admit they made a small mistake. Personally, I think it is one of
the most adult things a person can do. I was going to say manly,
but thought women would kick my butt for being sexest. 🙂
Kelly

I'm always happy to confess to dropping a good stinker! lol

😉

Originally posted by frogstomp
this one??? 2409

Well, yeah, Frog...that one.

It's relating to an exchange between telerion and myself back around page 5.

Originally posted by KneverKnight
I've said this before, but I'll say it again. I've heard the statement "no one saw coal form" or whatever as a negation of the idea that we can deduce anything "for sure"
Not so, as a simple example will illustrate. We look out a window and see two cars travelling away from each other on a straight two lane highway. We can measure their speed an ...[text shortened]... before there were humans around to see them ie 390 million years ago when coal started to form.

I would have expected a better example than this one. One that actually makes your case. You can only calculate when the cars passed if you assume a whole set of circumstances (just as in the case of origins).

You must assume that
1) both cars were moving the whole time
2) where they started
3) when they started
4) there was no change in acceleration
5) neither car stopped for a while
6) neither car has ever been in reverse

You are right. Similar reasoning is being used all the time.
This is my problem with present day observers deducing things about the distant past. Grand assumptions must be made, and that is simply not good science.

Originally posted by frogstomp
could you post some dimensions and while youre at it: consider that any disparity with other canyons might be due to it being the youngest so the walls have been a shorter period of erosion .

I've lived in AZ and ILL, the Mississippi river is quite large, there are
more than a few other rivers world wide not just the within the states
and none that I'm aware of have canyons the size of the Grand
Canyon in scope, if there are I’m sure the percentage per river is
quite small. If canyons are a direct result of rivers don't you think we
would see quite a few of them near the same size or at least close to
it for every river, especially the larger ones if rivers are the main
or most frequent cause for canyons. Unless of course you are
suggesting that rivers are basically a new or very rare phenomenon on
the globe except the one in AZ, that one alone has been here quite
some time?
Kelly

Originally posted by chinking58
I would have expected a better example than this one. One that actually makes your case. You can only calculate when the cars passed if you assume a whole set of circumstances (just as in the case of origins).

You must assume that
1) both cars were moving the whole time
2) where they started
3) when they started
4) there was no change in accel ...[text shortened]... about the distant past. Grand assumptions must be made, and that is simply not good science.

This is just quibble
1) do cars stop on a highway?
2) irrelevant
3) irrelevant
4) assume a constant speed, it's a straight stretch of highway.
5) do you drive?
6) do you drive?

You miss the point.

Originally posted by KneverKnight
This is just quibble
1) do cars stop on a highway?
2) irrelevant
3) irrelevant
4) assume a constant speed, it's a straight stretch of highway.
5) do you drive?
6) do you drive?

You miss the point.

Actually I believe you proved his point.
Kelly

Originally posted by KellyJay
Actually I believe you proved his point.
Kelly

Then you missed it too, eg what difference does it make when the cars started?
EDIT One car could be ten years old, started and stopped many times and on this particular day be on a 300 mile trip. The other car could be new, driven for the first time, on a short trip from the dealer's to its owner's driveway. It doesn't matter, it is irrelevant.

As such , Jesus is using a hyperbole to make clear the concept of mass destruction and the saving of good people, there weren't too many similar biblical stories that he could have used , since that was the only one.

In short: He wasn't attesting to the truth of the flood story.

Maybe, but he did quote it.

Originally posted by chinking58
God promised not to destroy the whole earth with a flood again. Any and every local flood that has occured since then is nothing in comparison to the flood of Noah's day.

Taking this promise of God into consideration, the fact that we still do have local floods is an indicator that Noah's flood was not a local flood, as some have claimed.

BTW; God has also said that the next time He judges the earth, it will be with fire!

Well Done

Originally posted by KellyJay
I've lived in AZ and ILL, the Mississippi river is quite large, there are
more than a few other rivers world wide not just the within the states
and none that I'm aware of have canyons the size of the Grand
Canyon in scope, if there are I’m sure the percentage per river is
quite small. If canyons are a direct result of rivers don't you think we
woul ...[text shortened]... omenon on
the globe except the one in AZ, that one alone has been here quite
some time?
Kelly

First the mississippi has is not in a mountain setting.Like the Colorado, Columbia, Salmon, Cheyenne, Escalante, Fraser, Thompson, Green, Yampa, San Juan , or Snake river canyons, just to name a few, so what would the Mississippi have to carve a canyon out of ?

Originally posted by David C
Well, yeah, Frog...that one.

It's relating to an exchange between telerion and myself back around page 5.

Oh ,, ok then .
However
this site Totally blows away the young earth idea.

http://www.asa3.org/ASA/resources/Wiens.html

all that answersingenesis.god is left with is Lies.

Originally posted by KneverKnight
Then you missed it too, eg what difference does it make when the cars started?
EDIT One car could be ten years old, started and stopped many times and on this particular day be on a 300 mile trip. The other car could be new, driven for the first time, on a short trip from the dealer's to its owner's driveway. It doesn't matter, it is irrelevant.

these factors are 'irrelevant' in calculating when/ if they passed each other?

Originally posted by frogstomp
First the mississippi has is not in a mountain setting.Like the Colorado, Columbia, Salmon, Cheyenne, Escalante, Fraser, Thompson, Green, Yampa, San Juan , or Snake river canyons, just to name a few, so what would the Mississippi have to carve a canyon out of ?

The ground.
Kelly