>> > What does the global flood camp have to ignore or bend?
In addition to problems with the interpretation of eres (land, earth, etc.)
as globe, there other features of the text itself that are a problem for
global flood claims. Gen. 7:20 says that the water level went up 15 cubits
and covered the hills/mountains (another flexible Hebrew word, har if I
recall correctly). 15 cubits high is enough to drown people, but not good
for covering the globe. 15 cubits above the mountains, as rendered in some
translations, is a modification of the text unjustified in Hebrew.
The claim that carnivory only began after the Flood runs into the problem
of clean animals being known to Noah ahead of time. Unclean animals such
as camels and horses were domesticated.
The claim that the waters above formed a canopy that collapsed to provide
water for the Flood conflicts with references such as Ps. 148:4 that assert
its continued existence.
Many other problems result from Flood geology rather than precisely
reflecting the issue of a global flood itself. Any global flood must
account for the provision and removal of water and the survival of the full
modern range of organisms. Flood geology, by adding the claim that a large
portion of the geologic record is due to the Flood, forces all sorts of
other things to have taken place during the Flood. Also, the character of
the Flood is problematic. It is asserted to be violently catastrophic and
calm and gentle, depending on what feature of the geologicrecord is being
explained.
A year-long global flood full of catastrophic activity would not be good
for the survival of an olive tree (or of the ark). It also does not seem
to match the relatively calm conditions of the waters receding.
If the whole globe is covered in water, what good does the wind do to make
it subside (8:1)? How can it recede?
Adding a bit of outside knowledge and Flood geology raises the problems of
accounting for the geologic and paleontologic records. It also raises the
problem of why no one knows just which rocks are preFlood, intraFlood, and
postFlood. Fitting every kind of organism that cannot tolerate immersion
in water of any one given salinity on board a single boat is problematic,
too. If the Flood waters were calm enough to not disrupt aquatic
organisms while circulating enough to not go stagnant, this would pose the
fewest problems. Nevertheless, everything intolerant of the chosen
salinity would have to be housed in aquaria on the ark.
Also, if all kinds of animals were on the ark and then commanded to go
forth and multiply, how could the adders comply? (Actually, this is easily
answered. Noah cut down a tree and made a log table.)
Incidentally, Glenn does suggest a way for waters to be receding after the
Mediterranean flood. He claims that the rapid filling of such a large
basin should cause the air to rise rapidly, producing lots of rain for the
surrounding regions.
Contrary to Darryl's ammendment, the data often differ between YEC
presentations and reality. This in part reflects the grassroots nature of
the YEC movement, making it difficult to spread corrections. Cultivating a
suspicion of authority also makes it difficult. Nevertheless, persistent
misrepresentation of the data does not speak well for the underlying views.
Examples such as the amount of dust on the moon, the origin of the
geologic column, or the nature of erosion show a lack of knowledge of the
actual data. If someone cannot provide acccurate information about the
present nor the past 200 years, how am I to believe their account of 10,000
years ago? Of course, belief in a young earth does not require accepting
all the erroneous claims that are currently popular as purported scientific
evidence for a young earth.
David C.
Explanation of examples of data problems:
Moon dust-The actual amount of dust on the moon is compatible with slow
accumulation over billions of years. The claim that there is only a tiny
amount is based on astronaut footprint photos and the mistaken assumption
that one sinks down to solid rock when stepping on the moon.
Origin of the geologic column: Various YEC sources claim that the geologic
column was invented to support evolutionary ideas. It was developed based
on observation of geologic layers in the first half of the 1800's, before
the widespread acceptance of evolutionary ideas, and the early work was
before wide acceptance of the great age of the earth. In fact, the first
major work on the geologic column in English was published in a book titled
The Character of Moses Established for Veracity as an Historian, Recording
Events from the Creation to the Deluge. Although I have not read that
book, from the title I think it is safe to assume that it is not atheistic
propaganda concocted in support of an idea that would be published 45 years
later.
Erosion: Incised meanders are on a list of things supposedly achieved by
dramatic erosion in the past but not by modern-day erosion. Our local
creek has incised its meanders in the past 50 years.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Jun 26 2000 - 11:57:02 EDT