Plants Could Totally Have Survived Noah's Flood Guize!
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
19-09-2013, 01:45 PM
RE: Plants Could Totally Have Survived Noah's Flood Guize!
(16-09-2013 03:02 PM)JAH Wrote:  No Paranoidsam he spread all that shit out from all the animals and that caused things to grow.

PleaseJesus, you are a fucking idiot. You squirm around honest questions with deception in an attempt to remove your obvious foolishness. I have an old friend who's family owns a ranch in northern Sonoma Co. I have brought up there many native grass seeds and even bulbs of native plants to try to bring them back to the only protected area on that ranch. One year when acorns were plentiful we spent an entire weekend collecting them and planting them in a specific area. Our results to date have been at best poor. Seed reproduction is difficult as any gardener would know. Noah's seeds must have been as magic as "Jack and the Beanstalk's" seed.

So... you're saying that when billions of animals and plants have been killed and pressed down and churned, that the resultant sopping wet soil is nutrient deficient? Is that your perspective from farming and agronomy?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-09-2013, 01:48 PM
RE: Plants Could Totally Have Survived Noah's Flood Guize!
Quote:So, what your saying is; we need a tree, a giant 5-odd kilometre high box with tree inside and then we need to add a few metric fuck-tonnes of slightly salted water.

Let's get to it, for science people!

So... you are saying that as the waters receded and found different spots to fill (internal lakes and seas) and as the intense hydrologic cycle continued due to the new, moist atmosphere, etc. that there were no places where there was fresh water for plants to grow after the waters receded?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-09-2013, 01:57 PM
RE: Plants Could Totally Have Survived Noah's Flood Guize!
(19-09-2013 01:48 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  
Quote:So, what your saying is; we need a tree, a giant 5-odd kilometre high box with tree inside and then we need to add a few metric fuck-tonnes of slightly salted water.

Let's get to it, for science people!

So... you are saying that as the waters receded and found different spots to fill (internal lakes and seas) and as the intense hydrologic cycle continued due to the new, moist atmosphere, etc. that there were no places where there was fresh water for plants to grow after the waters receded?

No waters receded since there was never a flood. The evidence is in. No flood.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Chas's post
19-09-2013, 02:06 PM
RE: Plants Could Totally Have Survived Noah's Flood Guize!
(19-09-2013 01:48 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  
Quote:So, what your saying is; we need a tree, a giant 5-odd kilometre high box with tree inside and then we need to add a few metric fuck-tonnes of slightly salted water.

Let's get to it, for science people!

So... you are saying that as the waters receded and found different spots to fill (internal lakes and seas) and as the intense hydrologic cycle continued due to the new, moist atmosphere, etc. that there were no places where there was fresh water for plants to grow after the waters receded?

Actually, there was no place for the water to go. The amount of water required to flood the world to the 'tops of the highest mountains' is about 4.32 times the total amount of water in the entire planet. We're talking about 4.52 BILLION cubic meters of water, when we only have about 1.36 billion on the planet now. If the water was still here, we would still be flooded... Drinking Beverage

[Image: GrumpyCat_01.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-09-2013, 02:30 PM
RE: Plants Could Totally Have Survived Noah's Flood Guize!
(19-09-2013 02:06 PM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  
(19-09-2013 01:48 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  So... you are saying that as the waters receded and found different spots to fill (internal lakes and seas) and as the intense hydrologic cycle continued due to the new, moist atmosphere, etc. that there were no places where there was fresh water for plants to grow after the waters receded?

Actually, there was no place for the water to go. The amount of water required to flood the world to the 'tops of the highest mountains' is about 4.32 times the total amount of water in the entire planet. We're talking about 4.52 BILLION cubic meters of water, when we only have about 1.36 billion on the planet now. If the water was still here, we would still be flooded... Drinking Beverage

You must have missed my earlier posts. The topography was closer to a smooth billiard ball then what it is now, like an orange with pits and bumps. There was very little water required to cover a few gentle, rolling hills.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-09-2013, 02:43 PM
RE: Plants Could Totally Have Survived Noah's Flood Guize!
(19-09-2013 02:30 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  You must have missed my earlier posts. The topography was closer to a smooth billiard ball then what it is now, like an orange with pits and bumps. There was very little water required to cover a few gentle, rolling hills.

And the evidence for this is... where, precisely?

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-09-2013, 02:44 PM
RE: Plants Could Totally Have Survived Noah's Flood Guize!
(19-09-2013 02:30 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  
(19-09-2013 02:06 PM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  Actually, there was no place for the water to go. The amount of water required to flood the world to the 'tops of the highest mountains' is about 4.32 times the total amount of water in the entire planet. We're talking about 4.52 BILLION cubic meters of water, when we only have about 1.36 billion on the planet now. If the water was still here, we would still be flooded... Drinking Beverage

You must have missed my earlier posts. The topography was closer to a smooth billiard ball then what it is now, like an orange with pits and bumps. There was very little water required to cover a few gentle, rolling hills.

I must have missed this particular day in geology. So the entire planet was gentle, rolling hills? How long ago, then, was this flood? Was the future location of Denver at sea level during that time? Did Mount Everest form overnight? Or is this what you must believe to get around the extra few billion gallons of water?

If Jesus died for our sins, why is there still sin? If man was created from dust, why is there still dust? If Americans came from Europe, why are there still Europeans?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-09-2013, 02:44 PM
RE: Plants Could Totally Have Survived Noah's Flood Guize!
lol AiG.

I bet God even facepalms at these guys.

I'm almost convinced that Ham and AiG are big ole Poes.

[Image: dog-shaking.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-09-2013, 02:45 PM
RE: Plants Could Totally Have Survived Noah's Flood Guize!
(19-09-2013 02:43 PM)cjlr Wrote:  
(19-09-2013 02:30 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  You must have missed my earlier posts. The topography was closer to a smooth billiard ball then what it is now, like an orange with pits and bumps. There was very little water required to cover a few gentle, rolling hills.

And the evidence for this is... where, precisely?

PJ has a degree in Anal Archeology and has discerned that from where he pulls all his assertions from.

(31-07-2014 04:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  America is full of guns, but they're useless, because nobody has the courage to shoot an IRS agent in self-defense
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Revenant77x's post
19-09-2013, 02:53 PM
RE: Plants Could Totally Have Survived Noah's Flood Guize!
(19-09-2013 02:44 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  lol AiG.

I bet God even facepalms at these guys.

I'm almost convinced that Ham and AiG are big ole Poes.

God would, if he existed. Dodgy

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: