Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

Posted Without Comment


The Arctic ocean is warming up, icebergs are growing scarcer and in some places the seals are finding the water too hot, according to a report to the Commerce Department yesterday from Consulafft, at Bergen, Norway.

Reports from fishermen, seal hunters and explorers all point to a radical change in climate conditions and hitherto unheard-of temperatures in the Arctic zone. Exploration expeditions report that scarcely any ice has been met as far north as 81 degrees 29 minutes. Soundings to a depth of 3,100 meters showed the gulf stream still very warm. Great masses of ice have been replaced by moraines of earth and stones, the report continued, while at many points well known glaciers have entirely disappeared.

Very few seals and no white fish are found in the eastern Arctic, while vast shoals of herring and smelts which have never before ventured so far north, are being encountered in the old seal fishing grounds.

AP story published in the Washington Post on  November 2, 1922

Thank you for chiming in Old Lurker. :) Upright BiPed
OT - I want to thank this website and the many dedicated ID people who use it for showing me that there is a real, scientifically-sound alternative to materialistic evolution, which I once accepted. Keep up the good work! It has a greater effect than you may think. old_lurker
Dean_from_Ohio, Thanks for the thoughtful answer. daveS
Yes, Psalms 104 ET
You mean psalm 104? Seqenenre
Seqenenre- Psalms has the mountains rising and ocean basins sinking after the flood. ET
Dean_from_Ohio, Do you have an approximate date for this global flood? daveS
ET@28: "Everest didn’t exist at the time of the flood. Read the Bible." Where did you find that? My Dutch 'Statenbijbel' (dutch equivalent of the King James) mentions in Gensis 7:19 that all high mountains were covered with water. I couldn't find anything about altitudes of any mountain. Seqenenre
so you do believe in a world wide flood, instigated by God, as punishment for further sin, covering Everest and the Poles?
Everest didn't exist at the time of the flood. Read the Bible.
I’ll have to go with, ‘All science so far.’
And we will stay with- you don't know what science is nor what it entails. ET
Dean, so you do believe in a world wide flood, instigated by God, as punishment for further sin, covering Everest and the Poles? I'll have to go with, 'All science so far.' NEWS @17, so where is William Dembski now? Touring/Speaking? Teaching? Where? I'd genuinely be interested, but I'll warant, not at all surprised. rvb8
@Dean_from_Ohio That would explain why my kids have came to the conclusion that there was no real rainfalls before the flood... J-Mac
The time of the flood and the age of the earth are two separate issues... If one removes the universe with a beginning out of the "pool of evidence" (as materialists often would like it to, because of the inconvenience of the implications of the first cause) only one method of calculating the age of the earth is left...Unfortunately, the margin of error is so great, that my wild guess is just as good as anybody's "scientific evidence for the age of the earth"... J-Mac
timothya @ 15 "Does the Intelligent Design community support the argument that there was a worldwide flood approximately 6000 years ago?" From my reading, and I would be the first to say that I am just an interested layman, I would say that Intelligent Design, by definition, does not take positions on biblical doctrine. Very simply, Intelligent Design looks at science first and takes positions based on what the science says. Undeniable Molecular machines, DNA/RNA as a computer code, the DNA/Protein enigma (which came first -- the chicken or the egg) the statistical impossibility that life created itself, the fine tuning of the universe for life, the inability after 150 years to identify a mechanism that can meet the claims of Darwinian evolution, etc. etc., all point to a designing intelligence. Who the designer is, what is man's relationship and or obligation if any, to him/her/it, is there special revelation in the form of scripture, all are metaphysical/philosophical/religious questions that transcend the bounds of science and as such are outside of the purview of I.D. Now, as far as the flood, there is a scientific case that can and has been made for a worldwide flood. I will leave it to you to decide how good the case is, but no matter where anyone comes down on a worldwide flood, the question, as I see it, is mostly irrelevant to I.D. as I.D. is looking at the design of life -- not necessarily how life has been impacted by catastrophes unless the said catastrophes have somehow affected the design. Does that make sense? Florabama
critical rationalist. Posting summaries from wikipedia as if they proved something indicates you need a name change to Uncritical Regurgitator. Andrew asauber
timothya at 16, you could do better than to use Wikipedia as a source. Dembski left Southwestern, as is generally known, because he did not accept the doctrine of a worldwide flood. Larry Sanger, co-founder of Wikipedia, agrees that it does not follow its own neutrality policy One outcome is that it is often just plain factually wrong about subjects for which the Wikipedian trolls aim only at detraction and facts are irrelevant. How Wikipedia can turn fiction into fact (Sourced enough times, the fiction becomes “troo”) Wikipedia: The world of heavily edited unfacts Wikiedia as astroturf Wikipedia’s declining stats Wikipedia hacked by elite sources now (The main problem is that the people who use Wikipedia do not care whether it is false or true. “Wikipedia is my library” is the new diagnostic for irresponsible laziness.) and Mathematician complains Wikipedia is promoting “pseudo-science” of multiverse (Then there were the minor revelations that core articles “don’t earn even Wikipedia’s own middle-ranking quality scores” and that some “editors” are paid by outside sources.) It is good to think someone who was once involved cares. News
Summary from the History of climate change science article at Wikipedia.
The history of the scientific discovery of climate change began in the early 19th century when ice ages and other natural changes in paleoclimate were first suspected and the natural greenhouse effect first identified. In the late 19th century, scientists first argued that human emissions of greenhouse gases could change the climate. Many other theories of climate change were advanced, involving forces from volcanism to solar variation. In the 1960s, the warming effect of carbon dioxide gas became increasingly convincing. Some scientists also pointed out that human activities that generated atmospheric aerosols (e.g., "pollution") could have cooling effects as well. During the 1970s, scientific opinion increasingly favored the warming viewpoint. By the 1990s, as a result of improving fidelity of computer models and observational work confirming the Milankovitch theory of the ice ages, a consensus position formed: greenhouse gases were deeply involved in most climate changes and human caused emissions were bringing discernible global warming. Since the 1990s, scientific research on climate change has included multiple disciplines and has expanded. Research has expanded our understanding of causal relations, links with historic data and ability to model climate change numerically. Research during this period has been summarized in the Assessment Reports by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
critical rationalist
From Dean: "Whitcomb and Morris suggested (I’m recalling via memory) that the earth had a thick, spherical, transparent zone of water vapor in the atmosphere that moderated the conditions for human life all over the earth, and that a vast subterranean hydraulic system of water channels under the surface of the earth was part of that optimal arrangement of water and heat distribution. The flood destroyed both, and the ice ages were a short transient response to the new conditions. If you look at the ocean basins now, they do look like the facial bones of a guy on the wrong end of a set of brass knuckles. What did those sinuses look like before the beatdown?" Does the Intelligent Design community support the argument that there was a worldwide flood approximately 6000 years ago? It seems that Bill Dembski does believe so (from Wikipedia): "While serving as a professor at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, Dembski wrote The End of Christianity, which argued that a Christian can reconcile an old Earth creationist view with a literal reading of Adam and Eve in the Bible by accepting the scientific consensus of a 4.5 billion year of Earth. He further argued that Noah's flood likely was a phenomenon limited to the Middle East. This caused controversy and Dembski's reading of the Bible was criticized by Tom Nettles, a young Earth creationist, in The Southern Baptist Journal of Theology, Southern Seminary's official theological journal. In 2010, the dean of Southwestern's School of Theology, David Allen, "released a White Paper through the seminary's Center for Theological Research defending Dembski as within the bounds of orthodoxy and critiquing Nettles for misunderstanding the book. The paper included Dembski's statement admitting error regarding Noah's flood." Southwestern Seminary president Paige Patterson, a young Earth creationist, "said that when Dembski's questionable statements came to light, he convened a meeting with Dembski and several high-ranking administrators at the seminary. At that meeting, Dembski was quick to admit that he was wrong about the flood. "'Had I had any inkling that Dr. Dembski was actually denying the absolute trustworthiness of the Bible, then that would have, of course, ended his relationship with the school,' he said."" All science so far. timothya
@ Dean_from_Ohio Thanks! Without looking at your link, would you say that the earth's overall climate was warmer than it is now? I mean you suggest there was no ice in north pole...so where was the water that forms the ice now? J-Mac
Sorry, sarcasm doesn't translate well online. Maybe next time it'll be no joke. EricMH
Does anybody here know or can guess what the climate was like, or could have been like, before the Noah's flood? J-Mac
Eric, "But this time global warming is no joke." Everyone told me it was not joke in the late 90s before it took a 20-year vacay and utterly disproved 95% of the computer models from that time. This time there really is a wolf? Do tell. No amount of evidence will dissuade a religious zealot. And make no mistake, climate alarmism is fundamentally a religious movement. Barry Arrington
What were the reports on November 2, 1923; November 2, 1924 and November 2, 1925?
Or for places other than Spitzbergen. goodusername
Well, that's because we had global cooling in the 60s. But this time global warming is no joke. EricMH
Fact checked by Snopes as true. News
What were the reports on November 2, 1923; November 2, 1924 and November 2, 1925? Seqenenre
Washington Post: Democracy dies in darkness. News
And now for the good news. Killing of baby seals in the region is at an historical low. Mung
If global warming destroys the world blame Jane Fonda and Bruce Springsteen. tribune7
Bill Nye could not be reached for comment. Andrew asauber

Leave a Reply