Me in Blue: ----- Original Message ---- From: philip madsen <pma15027@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2007 3:53:58 PM Subject: [geocentrism] Re: excuse my paranoia Allen can you give any biblical support for the contention that all life was destroyed.. couldn't tall trees survive in the water ? Difficult to see whole groves unaffected by a global flood with raging currents and such..flooding has a bad habit of undermining the root foundation and after a ~year under water root root would be the expected norm, particularly for 100-300 year old groves trees ..??UHH??? ..No, i think all significant plant life would have died even if scripture allowed plant life ot "survive"...but the seeds would still heve been abundent...........in fact all our coal and oil deposits could have come from that little "thunder storm" ........ scripture makes staments like "ALL living substnace was destroyed which was upon the face of the ground" in 7:23 & "AND everything that is IN the earth"Genisis 6:17....but the context could be construded as a little vauge ..? Did not all the fishes and animals of the sea survive? I assume fishes were spared since there is not even a vauge passage of scripture that would demand their total demise....and well.. whales are with us today....the emphsisi in the context is "the land" and we might say "breathing" but this begs the question if man so courupted the land that animals were included why were the plants excluded?? plants "breath" too.. :) ......Water covering the whole earth could be true even if in places trees imerged from only a foot of water. Genisis 7 20 fefteen cubits upward over the tops of the mountains unlikely that trees existed at the very tops of the mountains ....but the tops of mountains were visable for ~ 2 moths before the dove found a place to rest ..Gen 8:9..so no tall trees there, .when the dove did come back the best he found was a olive leaf..olive trees are not that tall, but aparently a olive tree did survive or at least what was left of a olive tree with leaves...the tree could have been dead; the leaf could have been dead too ?....it just says a leaf from a tree...... dead trees with and leavs in cold water can be preserved for long time but would be expected to die shortly after the flood subsided if it were the water that were perserving the tree....? Any way, the flood was caterstrophic that is a good indicator that even if "plant life" were spared total demise, any significant trees were not abundant certainly not 100-300 year old entire groves of trees !!!!!.......but hey i was not there ..... ? More , how long was the entire earth submerged. see attached image 10 ~ 150 days according to Genisis 7:23 PS im not looking at my LXX right now but i dont think it says anything significantly different that would further demand or preclude these issues..i get back to this tommorow........? The water could have began to subside quickly in some places.. and the integrity of scripture remains intact.. Philip. ----- Original Message ----- From: allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Sent: Friday, September 28, 2007 1:34 AM Subject: [geocentrism] Re: excuse my paranoia Although i dont agree with much of Mr. Setterfield this excerpt from Barry Setterfields's work on bilical Chronology addresses that very issue.........this issuse is but one of many reasons why i support the LXX but it is by no means the only reason.......... An external line of inquiry supports the long LXX chronology here, namely tree-ring dating. Stands of bristlecone pine in the USA have several living specimens around 4600 years old, one suspected of being 4900 years old, and 6 over 3000 years of age. It has been shown that they grow slowly, and are more inclined to miss out a ring than put one on. So the general age is about correct. Consequently, this means that the oldest started growing around 2900 BC. This means it survived the Flood on the MT in 2657 BC or 2305 BC on the short chronology. This is inadmissible. But on the LXX chronology, their growth commenced not only after the Flood in 3537 BC, and after the Babel incident in 3302 BC, but also after the Peleg continental division in 3006 BC. Allen PS I put several charts together to show the comonilities and the diferences between the Chrono modles in the LXX and MST..very interesting i think........you can almost reach paridy between them if the majority figures are used up to Abraham...... ----- Original Message ---- From: Neville Jones <njones@xxxxxxxxx> To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2007 7:16:32 AM Subject: [geocentrism] Re: excuse my paranoia Dear Philip, I agree with Jack that organic evolution is not a viable alternative to creation. Not in any way, shape or form. However, I want to pick up on the second thing you said, "the world has existed no more than 10,000 years and probably less." Are you questioning the Genesis record that allows us to estimate ~6,000 years for the age of the universe? In relation to this, I recall that someone resigned from ICR because of the ages of some trees, as determined from their growth rings. Does anyone else remember this and, if so, can they supply some meat on the bones, please? Neville www.GeocentricUniverse.com -----Original Message----- From: jack.lewis@xxxxxxxxxxxx Sent: Thu, 27 Sep 2007 12:50:20 +0100 Dear Philip, Of course I'm biased, but not against true science. I don't understand your comment below. Your sure its a viable alternative? It's not a viable alternative! If it were there would be no point in discussing it! Jack ----- Original Message ----- From: philip madsen To: geocentrism list Not me. I am absolutely certain that evolution is a viable alternative as to how we arrived today. I just happen to know with certainty that it did not happen that way, and that the world has existed no more than 10,000 years and probably less. Get Free 5GB Email – Check out spam free email with many cool features! Visit http://www.inbox.com/email to find out more! No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.13.31/1031 - Release Date: 26/09/2007 12:12 PM
Attachment:
image010.jpg
Description: image/pjpeg
