DiscussMormonism.com

How did all the vegetation survive? Did Noah take seeds of each plant variety with him, as well? Who reseeded the earth? That would be time consuming, eh?

All of the evidence in the Earth is consistent with a natural history which does not include Noah's global flood. It is a myth. "Amen!" to the credibility of the prophets, seers, and revelators who teach it as fact.

How did all the vegetation survive? Did Noah take seeds of each plant variety with him, as well? Who reseeded the earth? That would be time consuming, eh?

I think it would take more than a global flood to kill off all the seeds.

However, I prefer a local flood, such as the filling of the Black Sea and the notion that (from the local pov) the whole world was flooded spread amongst civilizations.

bcspace wrote:

How did all the vegetation survive? Did Noah take seeds of each plant variety with him, as well? Who reseeded the earth? That would be time consuming, eh?

I think it would take more than a global flood to kill off all the seeds.

However, I prefer a local flood, such as the filling of the Black Sea and the notion that (from the local pov) the whole world was flooded spread amongst civilizations.

The "Local Flood" theory begs the question: who cares? Could a "local" flood be big enough to affect plant and animal populations to the point that they needed to be preserved in a floating ark? How would that be preferable to God just inspiring the animals to migrate to a non-flood area? Heck, if Noah had enough time to build an ark, why wouldn't he have had enough time to migrate outside the flood zone along with the animals?

Also, assuming the story is true and the ark ended up on the top of a mountain, how deep would the water have to be, and how would a local flood be possible? If it just flooded a plain, or a limited spot of the earth, then the ark would have beached on the edge of the flood.

And what did the rainbow covenant represent? There have been innumerable limited floods in the last 4,000 years. What was God covenanting not to do?

Anyone ever wasted their time factoring in poo-per-day?

Not sure where I'd rather take my chances;

flood outside or mudslides in darkness inside?


bc,

your silly theory bears a striking resemblance to the odor of the ark on days 1 and 60.

Don't light a match unless you want to rewrite history.

My guess on the Flood. It was local. Noah did not take every animal on the ark. He took every domesticated animal and animal they used. This would enable him to restart his flocks after they got off the ark. Noah didn't know how global the Flood was. If God had told him, he probably wouldn't have released birds to check for him.

The Nehor wrote:My guess on the Flood. It was local. Noah did not take every animal on the ark. He took every domesticated animal and animal they used. This would enable him to restart his flocks after they got off the ark.

How does that theory answer cinepro's latter six questions?

bcspace wrote:

How did all the vegetation survive? Did Noah take seeds of each plant variety with him, as well? Who reseeded the earth? That would be time consuming, eh?

I think it would take more than a global flood to kill off all the seeds.

However, I prefer a local flood, such as the filling of the Black Sea and the notion that (from the local pov) the whole world was flooded spread amongst civilizations.

Quit lying bcspace. Your own Prophet, JFS stated that the WHOLE WORLD was flooded in order to baptize it.

You and your apologistic ILK twist and convolute your own doctrine in order to make yourselves feel better.

But according to your so-called "Read the First Bullet Point" in your tag - it basically says that your Cult can say whatever it wants, whenever it wants, and if something is no longer applicable or favorable, well, then they reserve the right to simply change it, white wash it, lie about it, convolute it or even erase it.

Your cult and its members stand for nothing.

Dr. Shades wrote:

The Nehor wrote:My guess on the Flood. It was local. Noah did not take every animal on the ark. He took every domesticated animal and animal they used. This would enable him to restart his flocks after they got off the ark.

How does that theory answer cinepro's latter six questions?

It doesn't but then we're a little short on details in the biblical account (whoever wrote Genesis seems to have been in a hurry to get from Adam to Abraham) and the Sumerian and Babylonian versions don't help clarify things either. There was a flood, some kind of boat, and some animals in it. The rest is theory.

Inconceivable wrote:Anyone ever wasted their time factoring in poo-per-day?

Not sure where I'd rather take my chances;

flood outside or mudslides in darkness inside?


bc,

your silly theory bears a striking resemblance to the odor of the ark on days 1 and 60.

Don't light a match unless you want to rewrite history.

It's not his theory, Inc. It's Pitman and Ryan's. Care to explain why you think it's "silly"? Keep in mind that what you're going to attempt to do is disprove/discredit a "silly theory" developed by two Columbia U. geologists.

Okay. Go for it.